











































































































✓ 



VIEWS IN 


LONPOIN.WESTM 


k. M [$ 



E' l EV 

Ll, a u p 







AND 

3T MA©MUI SHURCM. 


* 


0 . 






L ® S3 © © N 


































































THE 


HISTORY OF LONDON: 


ILLUSTRATED BY 

VIEWS 


IN 

LONDON AND WESTMINSTER, 


ENGRAVED BY JOHN WOODS, 

dfrom Original Braimttgtf, 

BY SHEPHERD, GARLAND, SALMON, TOPHAM, CLARKE, BROWNE, 

ROBERTS, &c. 


EDITED 

BY WILLIAM GRAY FEARNSIDE, 

AND (in continuation) 

BY THOMAS HARRAL. 


-London— opulent, enlarged, and still 

Increasing London ! ”—Cowper. 



LONDON: 

PUBLISHED BY ORR AND CO., AMEN CORNER, PATERNOSTER ROW; 
SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO., STATIONERS’ HALL COURT; 
ACKERMANN AND CO., 9G, STRAND; 

J. WOODS, WOODLAND COTTAGE, POND LANE, CLAPTON: 

AND TO BE HAD OF ALL BOOKSELLERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM. 


MDCCCXXXVIII. 

ENTERED AT STATIONERS’ HALL. 






MACINTOSH, PRINTER, 
GREAT NEW STREET, LONDON. 


PREFACE. 


The vastly increased extent of the Metropolis of Britain 
within these few years, and the immense improvements 
which have been effected by the erection of many splendid 
public edifices, and the formation of large, open, and 
stately thoroughfares in lieu of mean and narrow streets, 
constitute reasons more than sufficient for presenting a 
new “ History of London,” illustrated from designs 

• 

by distinguished artists. 

* 

Its appearance would have been somewhat earlier, but 
for the sudden and lamented decease of the original 
Editor, whose labours were prematurely closed at the 
end of page 144. His successor feels it necessary to 
mention this, not only by way of accounting for un- 



IV 


PREFACE. 


avoidable delay, but for any little discrepancies that may 
chance to be traced in the progress of the work. 

This will be found to be the only “ History of 
London ” in which the narrative is brought down to 
the reign of the present Sovereign, Her Majesty Queen 
Victoria. 


L O N D O N. 


- -♦- 

Many costly, erudite, and elaborate works have been compiled 
descriptive of the rise and progress of the vast metropolis of 
England, containing much valuable and historical information, 
but they are principally of an early date, and so voluminous, 
that the reader is compelled to peruse a mass of desultory 
matter in order to attain the leading features of the history. 
Knowledge is now scattered <f with so prodigal a hand” that it 
has become essentially requisite to condense with the utmost 
accuracy and perspicuity, the more material and characteristic 
facts, by comprising in a brief review those data, which may 
be considered the most important in affording interesting and 
useful intelligence. It has been attempted in the present work by 
comparative details, succinct but explanatory, to exhibit in a 
concise form, and to demonstrate by statistical accounts, the 
population, opulence, resources and magnitude of the commerce 
of London, the emporium of the world; making manifest the 
means by which the British capital has attained a zenith of 
grandeur and importance unparalleled in the annals of civilized 
nations. An effort has been thus made to concentrate the 
various information at present widely diffused, at the same 
time treating the subject more philosophically than has been 
hitherto essayed. The local objects deserving the attention of 
the antiquary or more casual observer have been minutely 
narrated; the manners, customs, and amusements of London 
at the more remote periods of its history carefully described; 
its civil, military, and ecclesiastical government cursorily 
reviewed, and the progress of literature and the advancement 
of the arts and sciences diligently traced. 

VOL. I. B 



‘2 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Our “ mighty capital” and its environs possess an endless 
variety of ancient and modern subjects for graphic delineation, 
and many constituents also of beautiful landscape, which 
in combination with the waters of the majestic Thames, 
present a more diversified assemblage of picturesque objects 
for the pencil of the artist and the e} r e of the connoisseur, than 
any other city in Europe. In selection of the subjects for scenic 
illustration, every exertion has been made to depict those views, 
which from their individual beauty, classic association, or union 
with objects of an impressive character, are capable of exciting 
and gratifying a refined judgment or pictorial taste. The 
various noble structures which ornament the metropolis have 
been correctly portrayed ; not isolated as they are usually 
represented, with merely the elevations of particular buildings ; 
but in connexion with their respective localities, which not 
unfrequently identify the objects. The numerous delightful 
prospects created by the recent improvements in London, 
Westminster, and their vicinities, have communicated fresh 
incentive to admiration, as well as contributed to the embellish¬ 
ment of the work; whilst the efforts of the artists have been 
unceasing, to blend originality of grouping, and fidelity to nature, 
with felicity of execution. 

As prefatory to the main design, it is to be in addition 
remarked, that indulging in speculative theories on the origin 
of a name, and endeavouring to trace from sources dependant 
only on oral tradition, the founder of a city, occupied too 
zealously the attention of many writers of antiquity; who 
pleased with a fanciful etymology, made data subservient to 
their purpose, and preferring to deviate from the more beaten 
path, wandered in the mazy labyrinths of their own imagina¬ 
tions, being more pleased in gratifying their visionary tastes, 
and the predilection of the age for fabulous narratives, than 
endeavouring to elucidate the plain “ unvarnished tale;” and 
in order to extol the people and cities they had undertaken to 




















% 



















I 





































































-0 

* 


















HISTORY OF LONDON. 


3 


describe, attempted to deduce their origin from gods, demigods, 
and heroes. A striking example is instanced in one of our earlier 
historians, the bishop of St. Asaph, styled GeofFery of Mon¬ 
mouth, whose intellectual capabilities and the opportunities the 
monastic profession possessed of obtaining by research and 
investigation, the most authentic information from the MSS. 
then extant, afforded him the facility of becoming the faithful 
chronicler of his own and previous eras; had not his inventive 
genius been too replete with fiction, disposing him to attach too 
much importance to marvellous and legendary lore, and induc¬ 
ing too ready an assumption of any new or fanciful definition, 
and thus from similar causes has posterity been often deprived 
of an irreparable opportunity of arriving at the truth of the 
remote annals of the kingdom. 

Many historians of old have fallen into the common error 
of corrupting the origin of names, which has emanated from 
a natural propensity existing of substituting in the place of a 
difficult or obscure meaning, an appellation more trite and 
familiar, and which at times is suggestedor authorized by affi¬ 
nity of sound. This pandering to the vitiated taste of the day, 
not only led the mind astray from following the path which 
would have conducted to the pure fount of historical truth, but 
distempered the imagination, by causing it to delight in the idle 
phantasies of romance; and in the instance of the Welsh and, 
other monkish historians, was in the sequel of still graver 
import, having been the cause of eventually involving two 
nations in w'ar and bloodshed; for on the assumed faith of these 
monkish legends of Britain, Edward I. founded his pretended 
right of feudal sovereignty over the kingdom of Scotland, which 
is especially exhibited in Edward’s answer to the bull of pope 
Boniface the eighth. The passages of GeofFery relative to the 
foundation of London are intimately connected with our subject, 
as in the reign of Henry VI. they constituted the received 
opinion of the origin of our vast city, their veracity being 

b 2 


4 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


maintained even in later days. The bishop, with the view 
of impressing his readers with the importance and supremacy 
of the British capital, indirectly traces its rise from divine 
origin, celebrating its beauty by supposing it to be founded by 
Brutus, a descendant of HCneas, son of Venus, the goddess of 
beauty , and daughter of “Jove omnipotent;” his words are, 
“ Brutus considering the state of the kingdom founded a design 
of building a city, and carefully surveyed the country to discover 
a place proper for its situation. At last finding' a portion of 
ground on the bank of the river Thames suited for his purpose, 
erected a city, and dignified it with the appellation of New 
Troy , by which name it was known for ages, which becoming 
corrupted was called Trinovant, the principal seat of the Trino- 
bantes; and in process of time,when Lud, brother of Cassibelaun, 
obtained the government, he surrounded it with a strong and 
stately wall, adorned with an infinite number of towers of 
curious workmanship, and changed the name to Caer-Lud , or 
Lud’s-towm, and commanding the citizens to build houses and 
public streets of all sorts, it soon equalled, if not exceeded, all 
cities at home and abroad. But some time after the new 
designation was again changed into Caer-London, and when 
the kingdom was afterwards conquered by foreigners, was 
changed into Londres This tradition, perhaps originating in 
the poetic fiction of the Druids or bards, when history possessed 
no records, save those committed to the recitative powers of their 
memory, acquired extensive credence; and we find it amongst 
the archives in the Tower, as well as being noticed in ancient 
writings, particularly in a work called Recordatorium civitatis, 
and others entitled Speculum, Liber Albus, &c. having been 
formally cited by the civic authorities in petitioning the throne 
for further immunities in the 7th year of the reign of Henry VI. 
when the mayor and aldermen pleading before the king the 
precedence in antiquity and dignity of the city and corporation 
compared with Rome, commenced “ Inter nobiles urbes orbis> 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


5 


&c. or “ among the noble cities of the world rendered illustrious 
by fame, not any can equal the city of London, the capital of 
your majesty’s realms, esteemed the wonder of the world, &c.” 
Again, “ For according to the credit of chronicles it is consi¬ 
derably older than Rome, having been founded by Brutus after 
the form of great Troy, before, Rome was built by Romulus and 
Remus, whence to this day it enjoys the liberties, rights, and 
customs of that ancient city of Troy. For it retains the senato¬ 
rial dignity and lesser magistrates, and its annual sheriffs supply 
the place of consuls.” It is needless quoting other authorities 
of the darker ages, which have only copied this history of 
romance, or advanced assertions equally untenable on the ground 
of probability. Even Pennant appears credulous, that London 
was a trading port, and “ a-place of much resort” previous to the 
invasion of the Romans, about fifty-five years before the Chris¬ 
tian era; and this belief appears the more strange, as Julius 
Caesar in his Commentaries, speaking as an eye witness, has 
dissipated all these visionary notions of the early grandeur of 
our metropolis, by minutely detailing the character and appear¬ 
ance of the principal settlement or town of the Trinob antes, 
and that it was merely a location of several men, with their 
wives and families, together with their cattle, partially defended 
by impassable woods, with fosses and ramparts with palisades, 
to prevent the sudden incursions of hostile tribes, and within 
which they retired when threatened with invasion. “ Oppidum 
autem Britanni vocant, quum silvas impeditas vallo atque 
fossa munierunt, quo, incursionis hostium vitandae causa, con- 
veniri consueverunt.” Strabo also mentions that the woods 
served the Britons as cities; the trees being felled, hedged 
them round in a large circle, wherein were constructed cabins 
or huts, formed also of trees, and stalls for the cattle, but 
which were not intended for long continuance : Herodianus 
gives a similar description of the primitive Germanic tribes. 
Diodorus Seculus is rather more minute in his description, 


6 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


where he says, that “ the habitations of the Britons were 
composed of reeds and sticks interwoven in the manner of 
hurdles,” a mode of dwelling frequently adopted by Nomaclean 
people. Dion Cassius in alluding to the Meetse, who inhabited 
the northern districts of our island, mentions they had neither 
walls nor towns, and that some of the Britons made use of 
trees instead of houses; and the faithful historian Tacitus dis¬ 
tinctly asserts that the Britons lived rude and dispersed, and 
were first instructed by Agricola, the Roman governor, about 
A. D. 80, in the art of building, being unacquainted not only 
with brick-making, but as far as the Romans witnessed had 
not attempted to lay one stone above another; and we may 
conclude our brief extracts from the early authorities most enti¬ 
tled to credit, and which we have deemed essential in illus¬ 
trating the facts of our native city, by making a short compi¬ 
lation from those authors previously noticed, and other classic 
writers, in reference to the original state of the ancient Britons. 

“ Except the chiefs, who were clothed in hides and skins, 
the people were generally found naked, and their bodies painted 
with the representation of different animals, and being gifted 
with few if any arts, it would have been inconsistent, in contra¬ 
distinction with other uncivilized nations, had they formed 
themselves into communities, and inhabited constantly towns, 
it being greatly to their advantage to wander in small parties, 
in order more effectually to find the means of subsistence for 
themselves and cattle.” 

In additional refutation of Geoffrey’s History, the earliest 
British historians, Gildas, who died in 570, nearly 600 years 
before the bishop of St. Asaph; Nennius, the Bangor historian, 
who flourished in 620; the venerable Bede, whose death occur¬ 
red in the year 735; and William of Malmsbury in 1140; and 
other authors who wrote before Geoffrey, are all silent as to the 
pretended foundation of the city by Brutus; and Gildas and 
Nennius both candidly acknowledge that their chronicles have 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


7 


been collected from the Roman Annals, MSS. of the primitive 
fathers, and other foreign historians, and doubting if their coun¬ 
trymen ever possessed any records, “ as their greatest scholars 
had but little learning and no memoirs.” 

No doubt can be entertained of a species of barter having been 
carried on with our island and the shores of Gaul, previous to the 
- expedition of Caesar, who specifies that one of the reasons for 
his crossing the Channel was in order to subdue a people pre¬ 
viously unknown to the Romans, but who during his Gallic 
wars “ had, it was understood, furnished assistance to his 
enemy.” From parties trading with the Britons, he obtained 
information of the different localities and means of defence, 
and from whom in return the Britons were apprised of the 
Roman invasion. It does not however follow that the commerce 
of the country w r as concentrated in the settlement of the Trino- 
bantes, nor that the occasional appearance of a few travelling 
dealers was of sufficient consequence to have conferred upon 
any particular place the importance of a shipping town and port. 
Besides, at the period of the occupation of the country by the 
conquerors, Ccimalodunum, now Maldon, in Essex, was a place 
of more frequent than,the settlement on the banks of the Thames, 
and which from its proximity to the sea rendered it a more 
convenient haven, than traversing an intricate river. It appears 
likewise that in Csesar’s time it ranked next in consideration 
to the royal seat of Cassivellaunus, at Verulam; and when 
Britain was taken possession of by Aulus Plautius, in the 
reign of Claudius, the Roman general established Cama- 
lodunum as a colonia, or colony, that is, a place governed 
entirely by Roman laws and customs; Vemdamium being con¬ 
sidered a municipium, in which the natives w'ere honoured 
with the privileges of Roman citizens, enjoying their own laws 
and constitutions ; Londinium being only styled a prcefectura; 
the inhabitants a mixture of Romans and Britons, who were never 
suffered to enjoy more than the name of citizens of Rome, being 


8 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


governed by prcefects sent annually from thence, without having 
either their own laws or magistrates. 

We have now arrived at a period when the progress of the 
city of London can be described with more authenticity; but we 
have been anxious thus early in our undertaking to show the 
disposition we entertain to avoid all fabulous narrative which 
the ancients were too prone to substitute for fact, or to blend 
truth and fiction so artfully together in prose and verse, that 
the high-wrought imagery often led the senses captive; and 
the youthful mind apt to run wild and unrestrained in the 
airy region of romance, became embued with the feeling 
that the world was like a beautiful picture, glowing with a 
warm and sunny sky, and the scenes of life ever tinted, 
avec la couleur de rose . This perception through a false 
medium is generally attended with injurious effects, as the 
disappointment and chagrin are relatively more severe, when 
the beau ideal, the fancy world of one’s own fond creation has 
vanished for ever from our sight, and life in dull reality 
deprived of its imaginary charms, seems only a bleak and 
desolate waste, robbed of all objects which had endeared and 
rendered it worth inhabiting. We doubt even that an exception 
should be made in favour of the mythology of the Greeks and 
Romans; for teeming as their fables do with poetic beaut}^ and 
interest, they have a more powerful tendency to delude and 
alienate the ideas, than convince the understanding, or to pro¬ 
duce incentive for useful or practical information, which can 
alone work out the grand desideratum we ought ever to hold as 
our guiding star, the attainment of that knowledge most condu¬ 
cive to the developement of the human mind, promoting the 
means for conferring the greatest good on the greatest portion 
of mankind; and though it has been said that we can under¬ 
stand any epoch of the world but imperfectly, if we do not 
examine its romance, yet we are sceptical of the corollary, that 
we find as much truth in the poetry of life as in the prose. 




HISTORY OF LONDON. 


9 


Caesar, who, in his Commentaries, is minute in the detailed 
description of the principal national characteristics entitled to 
note, would not have omitted allusion to the capital of the 
Trinobantes, or Tri-now-hant, inhabitants of the New City , 
the original name, according to the authority of Baxter, of our 
renowned metropolis, had it been conspicuous for buildings or 
fortifications, especially as Caesar appears ever anxious during 
his Gallic wars to represent to the Senate and the Roman 
people the extent and importance of his conquests. Had the 
principal place of resort of the Trinobantes exceeded in mag¬ 
nitude and consequence the fortified town of Cassivellaunus, 
which the Roman conqueror specifies, little doubt can exist, 
that the chief seat of the people, who, on his advance towards 
their territory on the banks of the Thames, were the first to 
tender homage to his power, as they had sought protection 
from the tyranny of Cassivellaunus, and solicited permission 
to appoint the young Mandubratius as their ruler, who had 
visited Caesar in Gaul previous to his second expedition to 
Britain, that their town would have formed a leading feature in 
the enumerations of his victorious progress in our island. But 
after stating that the natives informed him that the town of 
Cassivellaunus, Verulam, near the site of the present St. Alban’s, 
was fortified, and abounded with people, cattle, and provisions, 
Caesar, as a context, immediately adds the passage we have 
before cited, describing the kind of location the Britons called 
a town. The colony of the Trinobantes were a race of Belgic- 
Gauls, who having effected a landing, partly under the pretext 
of trading, and partly with hostile intentions, had recently made 
a settlement on the borders of the Thames, and had established 
themselves among the small nations, into which England was 
then subdivided, and were therefore anxious to avail themselves 
of a spot constituted by nature so eligible for their purpose, 
as the ground adjacent to St. Paul’s, then almost an entrenched 
mount; having the “ river of the Wells,” or the Fleta or Fleet 


c 


10 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


stream, on the west, which flowed into the Thames near Black- 
friars’ Bridge; a river, which some Parliamentary records 
preserved in the Tower of the reign of Edward the First state, 
had been in times past of “ such depth and bredth, that 10 or 
12 shippes, navies, at once with marchandizes , to ere wont to 
come to the bridge of Fleete, and some of them to Oldborne 
Bridge; having on the east a large brook, afterwards named 
Wall-brook, its course passing near and through the City’s 
walls, together with the fens and marshes in the precincts of the 
present id??z-church Street and Grass or Grace-church Street; 
“ Thames’s mighty flood” in front, with its swamps and marshes, 
extending on the southern side as far as the Camberwell Hills; 
and on the northward, or in the rear, defended by a thick 
impervious forest, extending a considerable distance into the 
interior, which, as late as the days of Henry the Second, was 
infested with beasts of prey and of the chase. The place thus 
afforded every facility for a safe encampment, which the Belgic 
people had already taken advantage of; and it w r as not therefore 
to be supposed that the Romans, with their skill and experience 
in military tactics, would overlook so favourable a situation, 
which, with the assistance of art, might be readily rendered 
impregnable to the predatory inroads of the native tribes, while 
at the same time a free communication was secured with 
the sea. 

The disposal of the feasible reasons which led to the site of 
our present city being fixed on is conclusively arrived at; not 
so, however, the designation of its name. Much antiquarian 
controversy has been bestowed on the subject, and derivations 
strenuously enforced at times as opposite as at others apposite 
to the probable meaning; eschewing however any prolix dis¬ 
sertation on this favourite theme of disputants, it may be 
well to notice the origin of those names which have acquired 
the greatest credit. The first authentic mention of the city of 
London is found in the annals of Tacitus under the title of 


HISTORY OF LONDON. U 

Londinium, when recapitulating the occurrences attendant on 
the slaughter of the Romans and natives amounting to 70,000, 
in Verulamium , Camalodunum, and Londinium , by the forces 
of the heroine Boadicea, queen of the Iceni, a district of Britain 
comprising the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, and 
Huntingdon. The learned and accurate historian asserts, that 
the city was so called from its situation, and Augusta from its 
stateliness ; adding “ co ia negotiatorum et commeatu maxime 
celeberrimum ,” noted for the number of its merchants, and the 
abundance of its provisions. These allusions would imply 
to the casual reader from Tacitus having been resident in 
London with his father-in-law, Agricola, governor of Britain, 
and wrote his history from 110 to 120 years after the first 
invasion of Caesar, that if the city had not arrived at an ante¬ 
rior importance, it must have made almost incredible progress 
to have entitled it to these terms of distinction ; but it is to be 
borne in mind, that the Barbaric nations subjugated by the 
Romans at that period, had, compared with their conquerors, 
made slight advances towards that envied form of organized 
society, ycleped civilization, a term assumed as a counter-dis- 
tinguishment between the state we are living in ourselves, 
and that in which others are existing who have graduated less 
forward on the polished and slippery scale of modern refine¬ 
ment, a condition, which beyond the moral barrier is extremely 
problematical in its tendencies, and is too often erroneously 
and invidiously applied. Without, however, further digressing, 
taking the term in its popular signification, the Romans were 
centuries in advance, more especially compared with the inland 
nations; but the shores of Britain had no doubt from the 
remotest date been frequented by traders from different parts 
of the world; the Phoenicians and then the Greeks having car¬ 
ried on a traffic with the southern and south-western portions of 
the island in tin, lead, &c.; the Germans, Gauls, and Belgians, 
having had a commercial communication with the northern 

c 2 


12 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


and eastern divisions in other commodities. These people, 
the Trinobantes, who had thus placed themselves in juxta¬ 
position with the Romans, were doubtless more apt and expe¬ 
rienced in mercantile affairs than the natives, who, having 
been insulated from communion with foreign countries, would 
not have attained the same extended and partially enlightened 
views of commerce, or of the ties and benefits of social inter¬ 
course, as a people in connexion with the continent, and who 
therefore only required co-operation to revive and strengthen 
their previously formed mercantile knowledge; and as the 
Romans were more versed in warfare, than the interchange of 
produce, they were satisfied in fostering the predilections of 
their allies, by granting immunities and privileges, encouraging 
the natives as well as confederate foreigners to cultivate those 
advantages emanating from trade, which have gradually pro¬ 
duced those magnificent results which we are now witnessing, 
of raising London to the proud pre-eminence it maintains 
among the cities of the world. In later years we have how¬ 
ever an instance strongly corroborative of the rapid rise of 
a city, in the example of St. Peterburg, the capital of that 
mighty empire, whose territories extend from the regions of 
ice, destitute of vegetable production, and unfit for the perma¬ 
nent habitation of man; to the region of the vine, the olive, 
and the sugar-cane, and teeming with human beings; an 
empire 138 times larger than the whole of Great Britain; yet 
in 1703 the spot was merely marked by a few humble fishing 
huts, erected amidst the swamps and marshes of nine small 
islands. Situated therefore as London was, it could not fail 
of becoming evident to the sagacity of the Romans, that exclu¬ 
sive of the strength of its military position, it comprised all 
the requisites for recommending it as an Emporium ; seated, 
as it was, on the banks of a river, whose waters were, 

Though deep yet clear, though gentle yet not dull, 

Strong without rage, without o’erflowing, full 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


13 


and which after flowing through some of the most productive 
and pastoral districts of the country, united with the ocean, 
almost within view of the Continent; and thus seemed self- 
constituted, a mart for home and foreign traffic. 

While these remarks are brieflv offered in contradiction 

«/ 

to the authorities of many respectable writers, who are worthy 
of much credit and attention, except on points connected with 
the early existence and importance of our famed city, we must 
in furtherance adduce, that for nearly a century after the 
landing of Caesar, London, notwithstanding it was a consi¬ 
derable mart, was not a principal town or seat of native 
government; and though the reverse of this and other state¬ 
ments we have made is insisted upon, the erroneous impression 
of occurrences has in some cases arisen either from an acci¬ 
dental or intentional confusion of data, and in one or two 
particular instances, where it was necessary to the elucidation 
of the theory, the 55 years previous to the Christian era, when 
Julius Caesar first appeared on our coast, are either merged, 
or made “ Anno Domini ” instead of “ Before Christ it is 
therefore we have been more minute in our research, and 
where we have not offered facts, but have been forced to 
reason hypothetically, we have endeavoured to draw our con¬ 
clusions from such just suppositional grounds that they amount 
almost to moral convictions. We find from Tacitus, Dion 
Cassius, Ammianus Marcellinus, and other early historians, 
that in the second year of the reign of Claudius Csesar, A. D. 
43, that the refusal of the Britons to pay the tribute levied 
by the founder of his dynasty, induced the emperor to send 
Aulus Plautius, the praetor, with a considerable army for the 
entire reduction of our Island. The Roman forces proving 
successful, the general, before his final conquests were 
achieved, deemed it politic to solicit the appearance of the 
emperor to crown his victories; Claudius arrived in Britain, 
forded the Thames like Julius Caesar in the sight of the Britons, 




14 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


whom he routed, and marching afterwards through Essex, 
captured Camalodunum, the royal seat of Cinobellinus, or 
Cynvelyn. During this war which was waging near the 
Thames, no mention is made by Claudius of the important 
city of London, though the Britons retreated through part of 
Middlesex and Essex, and must have passed near the metro¬ 
polis of the Trinobantes; and as vanity and ostentation induced 
Claudius to come to Britain, it is not likely that he would have 
omitted noticing the reduction of this principal town ; especially 
as Strabo specifies it was the custom in the triumphal pomps 
“ to set forth in glorious scenes the places subdued.” 

We must here revert to the controverted subject of the 
place where the Romans passed the Thames, as illustrative of 
the false reasoning often adopted to support favourite topics of 
discussion. Camden and others insist that Caesar, who mentions 
expressly that there was only one known ford where foot 
soldiers could pass, and which on his approach he found forti¬ 
fied by the natives with large stakes both on the banks and 
beneath the water, was situated in the neighbourhood of Wey- 
bridge, between Walton Bridge and Shepperton, and where 
the remains of a defensive work have been discovered called 
“ Cowey-Stakes;” a range of stakes composed of oaken piles 
shod with brass not lead, as mentioned by the Venerable 
Bede; but no weapons, we believe, have been ever found 
near the spot; though in the formation of the Weybridge lock, 
several feet beneath the bed of the river, a species of canoe 
was met with, formed of the excavated trunk of a large tree, 
affording an interesting specimen of a native bark, and which is 
preserved at lower Halliford; indeed it seems more likely that 
Cowey Stakes was a defensive work against the native hostile 
chiefs, than formed as an obstruction to the Roman army, 
exclusive of the circumstance, that that particular part of the 
river has been always recorded as deep and rapid, and not 
readily fordable; in addition, it would exceed in distance the 



HISTORY OF LONDON. 


15 


limits ascribed by Caesar that his passage was effected; which 
was eighty miles from the sea, or the port Ritupis, formerly 
near Sandwich, in Kent, and that part of the Thames which 
formed the boundary of the kingdom of Cassivelaunus. Others 
with more apparent justice have fixed on Kingston as the 
probable spot, and which during the greatest part of the 
Saxon era was designated Moreford, or the Great Ford; 
nor is it to be traced by traditionary or recorded observa¬ 
tion that any other neighbouring portion of the river was 
ever known as a regular and established ford the same as 
Kingston. The intelligent and able author of the “ Gleanings,” 
Mr. Jesse, has given an interesting and lucid dissertation, 
identifying Kingston as the ford in question, and his observa¬ 
tions are pertinent, and well worthy perusal. Teddington, 
Twickenham, and Fulham, have also had their advocates. Mr. 
Maitland determining to ascertain with accuracy and precision 
the decided spot, states, “ I discovered that the greatest marshes 
on the Surrey side reached from Wandsworth in the west to 
Woolwich in the east; then sounding the river at several 
neap-tides from the first of these places to London Bridge, I 
discovered a ford on the 18th of September, 1732, about 90 
feet west of the south-west angle of Chelsea College garden, 
whose channel in a right line from north-east to south-west, was 
no more than four feet seven inches deep. Therefore consi¬ 
dering this is the lowermost ford in the river Thames, I take it 
to be not only the place where the Britons passed, but likewise 
that which Julius Caesar forced, when he routed the Britons.” 
For a writer who generally displays much literary acumen 
and judgment, and whose works deservedly rank high in 
public estimation, it is not a little absurd to adduce so futile a 
reason, because near Chelsea reach the water in 1732 was of a 
certain shallowness, that during the flow of nearly 1800 years, 
the river had preserved an equal and uniform depth, or that 
any criterion in the eighteenth century could be formed of the 


16 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


current or bed of the stream half a century before the birth of 
Christ; when it is notorious that not only are channels fre¬ 
quently completely altered, and sands shifted, but also the 
accumulation from the sediment and deposits in rivers are 
immense ; as recently exemplified in the excavations made for 
St. Catherine’s Docks and the Tunnel, where distinct layers 
of deposits were observable at considerable depths ; and more 
especially in those of the London Docks and foundations of 
warehouses on the banks of the river at Rotherhithe, where 
from fifteen to twenty feet beneath the level of the bed of the 
river, hazel-trees and nuts have been found, as well as a bed of 
withies. Others suppose that the passage was effected at 
London, at one of the two old fords, Mill-ford Lane, opposite 
St. Clement’s church, where a con\-mill originally stood at 
the ford, or York Stairs, belonging to York House, the seat 
of the archbishops, which occupied the site of the present 
Buckingham Street, in the Strand, and streets adjacent; and 
now graced with the elegant and celebrated water gate of Inigo 
Jones. 

In reference to these latter places having been assigned as 
the original passage of the river, an insurmountable objection, 
in our opinion, is opposed to the probability, in the fact, that 
Csesar as an experienced general invading a hostile territory, 
and fording the Thames to attack the natives in a new division 
of the kingdom, uncertain of their resources or means of 
defence, would not have rashly ventured to pass his army 
across any portion of the river, subject to the rapid influx and 
reflux of the tide ; as in case of retreat and the flood setting in, 
destruction would have inevitably awaited his troops both by 
land and water. Dion Cassius also expressly asserts, that 
“ these temporary fordable passages were of a nature so dan¬ 
gerous as well as intricate, that they were only useful in a 
slight degree to the natives, who by dint of practice became 
acquainted with the depths and shallows; and when the emperor 























































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


17 


Claudius in his subsequent invasion of the country, endeavoured 
to pursue the Britons by such a route, his soldiers were brought 
into the greatest peril by the attempt.” Indeed of late years 
it is not unfrequently observed, that during a period of drought, 
or very low tides from the effect of wind, that a passage across 
the Thames at London might have been accomplished, but no 
one would infer from this accidental occurrence that a regular 
and acknowledged ford had previously existed; while on the 
other hand all these difficulties are obviated at Kingston ; in 
addition to which it may in conclusion be stated, that in lately 
forming the coffer-dams for the new bridge from thence to 
Hampton, swords, spear-heads, rings, and other Roman vestigia , 
principally implements of war, were found some depth beneath 
the bed of the river on the Middlesex side, where the conflict 
must be supposed to have raged the severest; then again in 
digging brick-earth in a field in Surrey, near the Kingston 
ford, a number of male skeletons were discovered with Roman 
remains, and no marks of boundaries, inscriptions or other 
monumental relics which could indicate the place having been 
dedicated to civil sepulture. About half a mile from the ford on 
the Middlesex bank is a British barrow, and near it can be 
traced an encampment, where no doubt the bodies of the Britons 
were buried after the battle, the Romans soon afterwards 
occupying the spot; evidently denoting that a mortal struggle 
must have taken place at this passage between the natives and 
invaders; at the same time it corresponds with the distance 
from the sea alluded to b}' Caesar, and is the first known ford 
where the stream is uninfluenced by the tides. 

The different assumed facts to which London owes its deri¬ 
vation are too numerous and inconclusive to allow us to occupy 
much of our readers’ attention, and we shall therefore merely 
allude to those which wear the semblance of any probability. 
Though the first application of the word Londinium and then 
Lundinium, to the infant city is from Roman authority, we do not 

VOL. I. D 


/ 


IS 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


recognize any constituent Latin words in the component appel¬ 
lation ; and think it must have been a latinized designation of 
the name applied by the natives, and which Mr. Maitland 
maintains originated from two Gaelic terms, Lon a plain, and don 
an eminence, or hill; from the plain which formerly extended 
on the northern side of the river and the hill adjoining it on the 
north, which by the Anglo-Saxons was called Corn-hill, which 
in former times was allotted for the sale of grain. Camden 
derives it from Llaiun-dinas or din, a city of ships ; other 
authorities Caer-Lud, or Lud-din, Lud’s city, king Lud having 
been elder brother to Cassivelaun, and renewed, the city walls, 
a derivation so full of anachronisms as not to need serious 
refutation. Llin-din, or the city of the lake, an appearance 
the Thames presented from the flooding of the low lands on the 
Surrey shore ; after the Saxon conquest it was termed London- 
Byrig, Lunden-Ceasier, Lundenne, and Lundain, Lunden- 
Wyc, Lunden-Berb, or Lunden-Burg, and since the Norman 
possession Londonia, Lundonia, Londine, and Londres. 

Previous to the defeat and death of the heroic and patriotic 
Boadicea in the year 61, it is authenticly recorded that the 
queen in her revengeful march against the enemy had com¬ 
pelled the Roman general Suetonius to evacuate Londinium, 
which was reduced to ashes by her followers; the inhabitants 
who were attached to the Romans, sharing a similar fate to those 
of Camalodunum and Yerulam. After this destruction of the city, 
the Romans on regaining their ascendancy assisted in its recon¬ 
struction, and the inhabitants having acquired the mode of 
making bricks, erecting houses and temples, draining and em¬ 
banking, cutting roads and forming causeways, were under the 
judicious government of Agricola enabled to attain in those arts 
some degree of perfection; we can therefore readily imagine that 
a new city speedily arose on the same favourite site, similarly 
devoted to that commercial enterprise, which had been before so 
eminently conducive in rendering it flourishing and ensuring its 






\ 





























































•• 




















* ' ; - ' . 


































*«• • • 


















: • 






• ■ 




. * - n 







• 





















; \ 

• - 











■ 
















- 










. 



















YM EE UPPEDS- P® ©L 







































































































































































































































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


19 


aggrandizement. We have already alluded to the rapid rise of 
cities, the elements of which are based on traffic, commerce 
being the main-spring of social intercourse, more especially 
if we assume that the high prerogative of man, the distinguish¬ 
ing characteristic of Ins proud pre-eminence over other animals 
consists, as it is stated to do by the learned author of 
the “ Wealth of Nations,” in the capability of interchanging 
commodities : “ Man,” says Dr. Adam Smith, “ is an animal 
that makes bargains—no other animal does this; one dog does 
not change a hone with another.” The early trade of London 
as alluded to by Strabo consisted of imports of salt, earthen¬ 
ware, works in brass, and polished hone, horse-collars, orna¬ 
ments, and toys in glass, amber, and other articles of the same 
kind. The exports comprised cattle, especially horses, skins, 
corn, and dogs, those bred in England having been highly 
esteemed on the continent for their excellent qualifications for 
the chase; qualities which it is estimated by the same autho¬ 
rity were inherent in them, and not the effect of tutorage of 
their foreign masters, to these must be added the dealing in 
human flesh , slaves constituting a considerable item among 
the exportations; and for the promotion of this revolting traffic, 
feuds were often provoked and warfare waged by the petty 
sovereigns of the inland districts of the island. We however 
as Britons have nobly redeemed the disgrace which attached 
in this respect to the character of the aborigines, having been 
mainly instrumental in abolishing the slave trade throughout 
the old world, and conferring the god-like prerogative on this 
our native land, that the foot of every stranger the instant it 
touches British ground is free, from that moment man becomes 
liberated from bondage in mind and limb ; though unhappily the 
picture is sadly reversed in the new 10 or Id, in that boasted land 
of liberty, “ the lustre of whose stars it is vaunted was never 
dimmed,’’ where there are nearly one-sixth of the population 
still labouring in an abject state of slavery. It is also thought 

d 2 


20 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


that the gagates, or jet stone, which may have been our native 
coal, formed part of the exports, as Solinus mentions it as one 
of the productions of Britain. 

London, which had now become entirely a Prcefectura under 
Roman government, though not subjected to the inconvenient 
restrictions of a garrison town, remaining a free city, where 
Roman and Briton mingled happily together, was not confined 
to the ancient limits between Fleet river and Walbrook, but 
extended from the eastern side of Tower Hill to the western 
declivity of Ludgate Hill, the width being bounded on the 
north by the causeway, which ran parallel with Cheapside, 
winding at each extremity towards the Thames, the town being 
intersected by a high street, or Prcetorian way , known as 
Watling Street, or Fosseway. For the capability of being 
enabled exactly to define the northern extremity, and many 
other important and interesting discoveries connected with the 
primitive history of the city, posterity is mainly indebted 
to the researches and discoveries of Sir Christopher Wren, 
who on rebuilding the church of St. Mary-le-Bow, after the 
fire of London in 1666, found, on opening the ground, a 
foundation firm enough for the new-intended fabric, which 
on further inspection proved to be the walls and pavement 
of a temple or church of Roman construction, entirely 
buried beneath the level of the present street, on which he 
resolved to build the new church ; and with the intention of 
bringing the steeple in range with the houses, he excavated 
the ground in advance to the depth of eighteen feet, when to 
his surprise he came to a Roman causeway of rough stone, 
close and well rammed with Roman brick and rubbish at the 

i 

bottom, and all firmly cemented, being four feet in thickness, 
and on which he based the tower: from this fact, and “ divers 
other reasons,” a similar road having been ascertained to have 
passed by the end of Bread Street, Cheapside, no doubt exists 
that this highway ran along the north boundary of the town; 










f . 












































































































































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


21 


and that the western confines did not exceed the top of Ludgate 
Hill, was decided by digging up at the same period near Lud- 
Gate, a sepulchral stone, where Ludgate church is now situated ; 
the monumental remain was dedicated by a wife to the memory 
of a Roman soldier of the second legion, styled Augusta ; it 
being expressly forbidden by the Roman law to bury within 
the precincts of cities, an edict always scrupulously adhered 
to. The soldiers were usually buried in vallo, or in the trenches, 
which here bordered the river Fleet, the Praetorian camp having 
been on the western side of the causeway, and most probably 
extending to the hill of Ludgate. 

Under the wise jurisdiction of the Roman Praefects, especi¬ 
ally the government of Agricola, who was eminent for his public 
and private virtues, London continued to advance in importance, 
and we find by Herodian, in his life of the emperor Severus ; 
who reigned from 190 to 211, that it was called “ a great and 
wealthy city,” and there is convincing evidence that its traffic 
and intercourse with the interior must have been materially 
extended, as in the Iter Britannicum attributed to the emperor 
Antoninus, out of the fifteen roads which are laid down as 
having traversed our island, seven of them are concentrated in 
London, either leading to or emanating in all probability from 
the Stone in Cannon Street, at the side of St. Swithin’s Church, 
called now the London Stone, but by the Romans Milliarium , 
or standard mile stone, from whence the distances to their 
stations were measured ; and though by some authorities it has 
been considered a druidical remain, and set apart for religious 
and civil uses, yet its locality to the causeways and the dis¬ 
tances computed from it coinciding exactly with history, seems 
to identify it for the purport alluded to; at all times however it 
it has been preserved with great care, having been deeply 
embedded in the earth and bound with iron, and seems in early 
ages to have been looked upon as the palladium of the city, and 
is now cased like a relic within free stone with a hole left in the 


22 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


middle which discovers the original. According to Hollinshed, 
a certain degree of superstitious respect also was paid to it; 
for when the notorious Jack Cade , the Kentish rebel, in 1450, 
who feigned himself lord Mortimer, came through Southwark 
to London, he marched to London Stone, which striking with 
his sword, said, “ Now is Mortimer lord of this citie,” as if it 
had been a customary ceremony in taking possession perhaps 
of the government of the city; or may have originated from 
the stone, which stood then in the principal thoroughfare, as 
Cheapside now is, having been the spot from whence procla¬ 
mations and public notices were delivered to the citizens. 

The principal military roads were Watling Fosseway, which 
led from port Ritupis, near Sandwich, now engulphed by the 
sea, through Kent and Surrey, by the Kent road to Stan or 
Stein, or Stoney Street, across Clink Street, by the present 
Winchester wharf, where the bishops of Winchester in later 
years had the stairs to their palace, connecting by the 
trajectus, or ferry, the Surrey and Middlesex shores, and 
entering the city by the Dwr or Dourgate, or Watergate, now 
Dowgate, and called by Stow, Downgate, from “ the sodaine, 
descending, or downe going of that way,” which now forms a 
continuation from Walbrook at the end of Cannon Street; 
taking a south-east and north-west direction, and passing to 
the site of the late New-Gate. The Ermine Street causeway 
traversed a south-westerly and northerly course, accompanying 
the Watling Street from Southwark, likewise entering by 
Dowgate, passing through by Cripplegate taking its way by 
Highbury Barn to Stroud Green, The Vicinal Way conducting 
from the city by Aldgate to Bethnal Green, and then to the 
trajectus at Old Ford, across the river Lea to Duroleiion, the 
modern Leyton, or Leytonstone, in Essex. 

Though much controversy has been created respecting'the 
period of the city having been enclosed with walls, yet little 
doubt can exist that in the year 296, during the reign of Diode- 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


23 


sian and Maximinian it remained unfortified, as the city nar¬ 
rowly escaped being pillaged by a party of pirate Franks, 
who after the defeat in that year of the army of the tyrant and 
usurper Alectus having evaded the Roman forces, determined to 
ransack London, and escape to sea with their booty; but 
fortunately a Roman squadron, detached from the main fleet 
in a fog, opportunely arrived in the Thames, and liberated the 
city to the great joy and satisfaction of, the inhabitants; had 
therefore London been protected by walls, it could not have 
been subjected to these surprises. Some authorities are in 
favour of the opinion that either Constantine the Great or his 
mother Helena had founded the walls, which is corroborated 
according to Mr. Pennant, by the circumstance of a number of 
coins of Helena having been discovered beneath the founda¬ 
tions, supposed to have been placed there in her honour by her 
son. Mr. Maitland and others support the conjecture, and 
we are inclined to think with more truth, that Theodosius, 
governor of Britain in 368, caused them to be erected, a fact 
strengthened by the coincidence, that the Roman forces had 
been so gradually diminished in numbers during the reigns of 
Constantins, Julian, and Valentinian, that they had not 
been enabled to contend successfully against the Piets, Scots, 
Franks, and Saxons, w r ho by turns invaded Britain, and reduced 
the country to the greatest distress, until the arrival of the Roman 
general Theodosius, who routing the enemy, entered London 
in triumph, “ then in the utmost misery and affliction, occa¬ 
sioned by the great ravages committed by those insatiate free¬ 
booters.” Had the city been environed with walls by Helena 
or Constantine they would have been in a good state of defence, 
after their recent erection, not more than thirty-seven years 
having transpired from the death of Constantine to the arrival 
of Theodosius, so that the inhabitants and garrison might have 
temporarily defied the occasional assaults of these predatory 
bands. As to the discovery of the coins of Helena, we are of 


24 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


opinion, that the occurrence may be readily reconciled, when 
it is taken into consideration that Chlorus Constantins , the 
father of Constantine, husband of Helena, had been resi¬ 
dent in Britain till his death, which occurred at York, little 
more than half a century previously, having obtained the title 
of Caesar, which he merited from his victories in Britain and 
Gaul; therefore it was more than likely that coins in memory 
of his wife and the mother of the Great Constantine should 
have been deposited beneath the foundations, commemorative 
of the various benefits conferred, and which were fresh in the 
recollection of the citizens. 

It is generally supposed that the name Augusta , which for a 
short period superceded the ancient 'appellation of Londinum, 
until the occupation by the Saxons, and which has been since 
often poetically alluded to, was applied to the city, not in honour 
of the empress Helena, but was assigned to it by Theodosius, 
as the capital of the Roman British dominions ; having been at 
first a name of distinction conferred on seventy cities in the 
Roman provinces, in honour of Augustus Csesar, but was after ¬ 
wards adopted in the later years of the empire to designate any 
city of importance or grandeur. We are told by the historian 
of these times, Ammianus Marcellinus, that Theodosius, by 
repairing some cities and castles, and fortifying and. erecting 
others, left every thing on so good a footing, that peace was 
preserved in Britain till the Romans quitted our shores, in the 
reign of Honorius, when their own territories being invaded by 
Alaric, the Goth, the emperor required the combination of all 
his forces, and London had to regret the final departure of the 
beneficent founders of her fame and greatness. Chronologers are 
undecided respecting the date when this event took place, some 
fixing it in the years 402, 422, and 437, but the greater number, 
among whom is M. Playfair, in 426; as, however, king Alaric, 
who it is assumed was the cause of the withdrawal of the last 
Roman legion, died in 410, and the emperor Honorius in 423, 
the earlier period merits the greatest credence. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


25 


The walls of the city commenced from a fort built by the 
Romans on the site of the present Tower, which Mr. Bagford 
is of opinion still remains in that portion of the fortress 
called the “ white tower.” Early authorities have erroneously 
attributed its erection to Julius Csesar, and it is alluded to 
occasionally in history as Csesar’s Tower, an application however 
often indiscriminately applied to a commanding part of many 
of the castles of antiquity ; but the more authentic supposition 
is iri favour of the White Tower having been constructed by 
William the Conqueror. The walls were built at first in a 
northerly direction towards the present Aldgate, passing by 
Postern Row, and across George Street, Tower Hill, adjoining 
which street are the most perfect remains now extant of this 
ancient bul wark of our forefathers; the walls appear to have 
been about twenty-two feet in height and nine feet in thickness, 
composed of Roman brick or tiles, and rag-stone, the mortar, 
as is usual in Roman works, cementing itself as hard as the 
stone itself: the walls then skirted the Minories bv Hounds - 

7 i/ 

ditch, traversing Bishops gate Street, forming a direct line with 
the northern side of London Wall to Cripplegate, turning 
southward from the churchyard of St. Giles, where exists the 
only specimen of the round towers by which the walls were 
defended ; these towers consisted of fifteen in number, including 
the principal eastern tower near the Thames, and calculated 
to have been forty feet in height; the wall then passed Alders - 
gate along the back of Bull and Mouth Street to Newgate, 
thence to Ludgate, edging the declivity which sloped towards 
the Fleet river to the spot afterwards occupied by the castle of 
Mounffitchet, built by a Norman noble of that name in the time 
of William T. and stood near Printing-house Square ; from 
that point the wall extended to Thames Street, from whence 
with the towers it ran parallel with the river until united with 
the eastern fort or tower ; the portion of the wall fortifying the 
banks of the Thames is alluded to by Fitz-Stephen, who 

VOL. i. e 


26 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


writing in the reign of Ilenry II. states, tf the wall was high 
and great, well towered on the north side, with due distances 
between the towers ; on the south side also the citv was walled 
and towered, but the fish-abounding river Thames with its 
ebbing: and flowing:, hath long: since subverted them.” The 
circuit of the walls inland comprised two miles and 208 feet, 
and including the river frontage three miles and 165 feet. 

The cit}^ was originally entered from the country by three 
gates; the eastern portion by the Aid-gate, supposed to have 
been named by the Saxons aid, or old, from the dilapidated 
state in which they found it; from the north by the Alder s- 
gate, or according to other highly respectable antiquarian 
authorities, by New-gate, or Cripple-gate ; the derivation of 
the former is uncertain, but stated to have been the “ Older- 
gate ;” that of Newgate, not from the gate having been of later 
origin, but from its having been renewed; and it would 
appear probable from the Watling Street causeway pointing 
in that direction to have been one of the earlier egresses of the 
city; and it is on record, that in the year 1218, the gate was 
appropriated to its present use as a gaol for felons taken in 
the city of London or county of Middlesex. At Cripplegate the 
lame and cripples were wont to station themselves craving charity, 
traditionary miracles having been there wrought, “ so that the 
lame from thence did goe upright, praising God;” occurrences 
which are stated to have taken place in the year 1010, when 
the coffin of King Edmund the Martyr passed through it 
from j Bedrisworth, or St. Edmund’s Bury, in order to preserve 
the sanctified remains from the indignities of the piratical 
Danes. The gate is therefore of considerable antiquity, and is 
supposed to have been erected over the Ermine Street cause¬ 
way. The western division of the city was attained by the 
Lud-gate, a corruption of Flud-g ate, from the Saxon jlod, vloet, 
jleote, or flete, implying a small navigable watercourse, as the 
Fleet rivulet was in former ages. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


27 


In process of time, the suburbs becoming more extended, 
other gates were erected for the convenience of the citizens, 
as the Postern-gate, by the Tower, which was built soon after 
the conquest “ in a beautiful manner, with stones brought from 
Kent and Normandy,” and close to which was a famous spring, 
“ much admired by the citizens, and well preserved,’’ and the 
spot is now marked by some posts, and the pump still supplies 
the parishioners with wholesome water. The original gate 
fell down in the year 1440, in the reign of Henry VI., and 
according to Stow, “ was never re-edified, but a homely 
cottage with a narrow passage, made of timber, lath, and 
loame, hath been in place thereof set up;” the ruin of the said 
postern having began in the year 1190, when William Long- 
champ, bishop of Ely, and chancellor of England, caused 
part of the city wall, “ to wit, from the said gate towards the 
river Thames, to be broken down for the enlarging of the 
Tower, which tower he compassed about with a wall, and 
now forms the outer wall of the Tower, and caused also a 
broad and deep ditch to be made without the same, intending 
to have had the river Thames to flow about it; by means of 
this ditch the foundation of the gate being loosened, at length 
fell down.” Bishops-gate, “ but of what antiquity or by 
whom erected, or on what occasion named, is unknown,” 
though generally conjectured to have been built by Bishop 
William, the Norman, in the reign of William the Conqueror, 
but not so early as the year 675, when Erkenwald was bishop 
of London, the foundation of the wall having been discovered 
to have been four feet deeper than the foundation of the gate. 
Moor-gate, situated near the north end of Coleman Street, was 
built in the year 1415, for the easier access of the citizens to 
their gardens and the adjacent fields for recreation, at which 
time from its vicinity to the moors and marshes it received its 
appellation. Bridge-gate was so named, from its situation 
on the old London Bridge. Dowgate, or Dour , or water-gate, 

f 1 


28 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


we have before alluded to, as being erected where the Irajectus, 
or Roman ferry was situated, and the entrance of the Watling 
Street causeway from the Surrey shore. The other gates 
mentioned in history, as Wolf-gate, Eb-gate, Puddledock- 
gate, Oyster-gate, Butolphs-gate, Billingsgate, and the 
water-gates by the Tower and Custom-house were not places 
of thoroughfare through the city’s walls, but only wharves, or 
certain localities for the landing of goods, and were designated 
from the names of the owners, neighbouring places, or articles 
landed, and were most probably erected long after the conquest 
and the breaking down of the w r all; but as the principal wharf, 
or original landing-place, retained the name of Dow-gate, 
from the gate which once stood there, the owners and builders 
of the wdiarves and quays also dignified them with the epithet of 
gates. Some of the city’s gates were very handsome and costly 
structures, especially in later times, when the citizens emulated 
each other in benefactions and bequests for their embellishment. 
Ludgate, which w r as taken down and rebuilt in the reign of 
Elizabeth, was not even at that time re-constructed at a less 
expense than £T500. When in the last stage of decay the gates 
were pulled down; the old matarials brought considerable 
prices. Aldgate was sold for £157 10 s ; Ludgate for £148; 
and Cripplegate for £91. 

The Barbican, an Arabic word for watch tov/er, according 
to Camden, called also Specula, or Burhkelining, as mentioned 
by Stow, was customarily attached to fortified towns, and at 
London stood near the walls to the cast of Aldersgate, and 
though all vestige has been for centuries removed, and the 
dangers which it was erected to avert have long ceased to exist, 
yet the name is still preserved. The Romans kept here cohorts 
of soldiers, watching during the day the approach of any hostile 
force, and by night keeping lights on its summit to direct the 
course of the weary traveller, or market people coming to the 
city with provisions; the same was the intention of a lantern 








m/ior>, Published dev! 1,1631, by iY.S.Orr k C°. Amen- 











































































































•1 

























































































*■ 





















' 
























































' 























. ■ 









♦ 




* 1 





















N 







. 















































I 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 29 

on the top of the steeple of Bow church previous to the fire of 
London. 

Towards the latter period of the Roman occupation of London, 
the fort or tower in all probability formed the mint, as it did the 
treasury, in which the public money was deposited; a silver 
ingot and some gold coins of the Emperors Honorius and Arca- 
dius having been discovered in 1777 in digging the foundation 
of a new office for the board of ordnance. Though we have no 
certain date afforded us by which we can arrive at any distinct 
account of the extent or increase of the commerce of the city, 
previous to the secession of the Romans, yet some idea may be 
formed of the augmented resourses of the port from extended 
agriculture and facility of inland communication, by the exports 
which are recorded to have taken place in the year 359, 
amounting to no less than 800 cargoes of grain. We find 
likewise that the Romans had not only instructed the London 
youth and citizens in military tactics and means of artificial 
defence, but imparted to them the results of their more enlight¬ 
ened knowledge and education, initiating them in those arts and 
sciences most conducive to their future comfort and prosperity. 
Thus in the reign of Constantine, the Britons had acquired so 
much celebrity in the art of building, that the emperor ordered 
the dilapitated towns of Gaul and fortresses on the Rhine to be 
repaired by British architects and artificers. 

According to Bagford the Romans established in London a 
field of Mars in imitation of that at Rome ; in alluding to which 
he says, “ on the further side of Whitechapel Street, near 
Bishopsgate Street, was another station of the Romans, in that 
part which formerly bore the name of ' the old artillery ground,’ 
and was then the field of Mars, in which place the Romans 
trained up and exercised their young soldiers, and likewise the 
youth of the neighbouring Britons, in the skill and exercise of 
arms, that they might be more expert in the use of them upon 
all emergent occasions, and it must needs have been a very large 


30 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


place, as the same is excellently described, and likewise 
observed to have been a Roman camp, by a judicious author in 
the reign of Queen Elizabeth.” 

Of the sports and pastimes of this early period little authentic 
information has reached us, which is the more to be lamented, 
as in order to form a correct estimation of the character of any 
particular people, it becomes essential the investigation of the 
manner in which they have passed their leisure hours. It is 
remarked with much discrimination, that war, policy, and other 
contingent circumstances may effectually place men at different 
times, in different lights and shades, but when we follow them 
into their retirements, where no disguise is necessary, we are 
more likely to see them in true colours, and may better judge of 
their natural dispositions. Unfortunately, all the information that 
remains respecting our ancestors is derived from foreign writers, 
only partially acquainted with them as a people, and totally 
ignorant of their domestic amusements. We learn however from 
the imperfect hints of ancient historians, that our forefathers 
were ever tenacious of their native liberty, and inured to great 
bodily fatigue, being expert in hunting, for which the native dogs 
have been ever celebrated, in running, leaping, swimming, wrest¬ 
ling and hurling ; to which no doubt were added those pastimes 
most in vogue with their conquerors; as we know that the Romans 
generally philosophized on most of their actions and institutions 
connected with the weal of the mass of the people, and seem ever 
to have held in view the necessity of creating not only a love of 
exercise in a martial point of view, but likewise as a source of 
amusement, and appear to have been more fully aware and more 
to have appreciated the knowledge than we are prone to do in 
the nineteenth century, that the withdrawal of the people from 
public games and places of amusements is the sure and gradual 
means of conducing to a greater degree of demoralization. The 
mind of the lower classes of society unoccupied during those hours 
it is freed from professional calling, without any decided point 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


31 


of attraction or means of pastime, is thrown upon its own resources 
with too often few mental qualifications. The man wanting 
relaxation from the toils of the day, and in many instances with 
little means of securing much domestic comfort, is induced to 
resort to houses where he must drink exciting liquors in order 
to procure society, instead of being enabled to meet companion¬ 
ship in the fields, or in assemblages where sports or spectacles 
are carried on ;—a relaxation to his nervous system, as advanta¬ 
geous, in a moral, as it would be, in a physical consideration, 
and the beneficial results would be more particularly applicable 
in this our densely populated city, as well as the larger towns in 
our manufacturing districts, where the principal portion of the 
inhabitants pass great part of their lives in a close and sedentary 
occupation, and absolutely require every facility to be afforded 
them of procuring fresh air and salutary recreation. 

In reference to our early field sports, one fact is identified 
with our ancestors, which we glean from Caesar’s history, that 
they did not reckon hares as animals of chace, nor did they 
eat their flesh, although the island abounded with them; an 
abstinence which arose “ from a principle of religion;” a prin¬ 
ciple, preventing them from being worried to death by dogs, 
which as a tame, inoffensive animal, was a cruelty reserved for 
more enlightened ages. During also the establishment of the 
Romans in Britain, there do not appear to have been any 
restrictive laws enacted for the preservation of game; but it 
was an established maxim in the jurisprudence of that people, 
to invest the right of such things as had no masters with those 
who were the first possessors; wild beasts, birds, and fishes, 
became the property of those who first could take them—an 
honest feeling! which it would much have redounded to the 
honour of this country had it been handed down inviolate to 
the present generation, like the laws of the Persians of old : 
and would have prevented many instances of disgraceful liti¬ 
gation, demoralization, persecution, and bloodshed. 


32 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


The protecting genius of the kingdom seems for a time to 
have winged its flight from our shores on the removal of the 
Roman eagles; for shortly after the final departure of the 
Romans, the natives left to their own resources and means ot 
defence, soon finding themselves incompetent to resist the 
desperate incursions of the Piets and Scots, were induced to 
solicit the assistance of the Saxons; a fierce, untamed, but 
courageous people, who with their leaders ITengist and Horsa, 
landed in the Isle of Thanet, in the years 448-49; but the 
Britons found out too late the fallacy of trusting their indepen¬ 
dence to a foreign power, and to their chagrin discovered that 
they had in relieving themselves from the terror of one enemy, 
laid themselves open to the assaults of another ; as the Saxons 
soon took occasion to violate the compact which authorized their 
appearance in arms in Britain. During however eight to nine 
years after the arrival of the Saxons, the Britons retained 
possession of London, as in the year 457, having been defeated 
at Crayford, in Kent, they fled preipitately, according to the 
Saxon chronicles, to their capital, “ Lunden-Byrig. Yortigern 
and Vortimer were the royal leaders under whom the Britons 
continued the war ; but Hengist unable to obtain any decisive 
advantage in the field, had resource to treachery and stratagem 
to complete his conquest; and having made Yortigern prisoner, 
received as the king’s ransom the provinces of Essex, Middle¬ 
sex, and Sussex ; London becoming the chief city of the Saxon 
kingdom of Essex; and though during the fruitless and san¬ 
guinary struggles of the Britons to free themselves from the 
Saxon yoke, London, from the mercantile importance it 
maintained, was more than any other part of the island sub¬ 
jected to the evils attendant on intestine warfare, yet in the 
early part of the seventh century it had recovered its ascendancy, 
being alluded to by Bede as the “ emporium of many nations,” 
and became placed under the government of a Portgrave, or 
Portreve, which implies the consideration the port was held 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


33 


in to require the specific superintendence of a magistrate or 
governor. 

After the establishment of the Saxon heptarchy, Ethelbert, 
king of Kent, to whom the other sovereigns were feudatory, 
established his seat of empire at Canterbury, thus constituting 
it the metropolis of England; London loosing the protective 
and prescriptive power of the court, an influence which is 
reckoned mainly contributive in promoting the opulence and 
importance of a city ; but London could not be deprived of its 
local advantages as a trading port, and therefore retained its 
commercial superiority. Unfortunately the hiatus which occurs 
in the early civil history of the heptarchy precludes any defi¬ 
nitive information being collected respecting its mercantile 
relations, from the period of the reign of Eadbald, who succeeded 
Ethelbert in 616, to the year 764. We merely learn that in 
658 the city was ravaged by a plague; in 764 and 798 it suffered 
severely from fire, especially in the latter year, numbers of the 
inhabitants perishing in the flames; and in 801 before sufficient 
time had elapsed for its revival, a third conflagration nearly 
completed the work of destruction. To this devastation the very 
construction of the city rendered it liable, the Romanshaving built 
the streets after the model of those in their own country, which 
were extremely narrow; and the houses being principally com¬ 
posed of wood covered with straw thatch, which had superseded 
the British roofings of reeds, were subject to frequent and rapid 
ignition. Latterly during the Roman occupation the roofs of 
the principal structures were protected with scinclulce, or 
shingles, and some with tegulce, or tiles, and a few with glatta, 
or slates. The holes which originally formed the escape for the 
smoke, were by the Romans transformed into cupola clumnies; 
and as the valuable formation of glass for windows had not been 
then introduced, the windows, or Uynt-dor , passage for the 
wind, serviceable also for the admission of light, were furnished 
with wooden lattices or sheets of linen. 

F 


VOL. I. 


34 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


In filling up the chasm which occurs in the domestic history 
of London, we are indebted to the ecclesiastical annals of the 
country for throwing some light on the obscurity of the city during 
this lapse of years; and we find that in 600 the monk Augustine 
having been appointed archbishop of England by Pope Gre¬ 
gory, ordained Mellitus, bishop of the East Saxons, who 
having been successful in the conversion of the people, Ethel- 
bert about the year 610 erected for him a church in London, on 
the site occupied by the present St. Paul’s, and dedicated it lo 
that saint, who in his migrations is supposed to have visited the 
British Islands. Sebert who at this period was king of the East 
Saxons, and had adopted the Christian religion, witnessing the 
rapid advance of the new tenets among his subjects, erected 
another place of worship on the Isle of Thorney, where a Roman 
temple stood sacred to Apollo, which formed the origin of St. 
Peter’s Cathedral, at Westminster. 

London now began to acquire an additional degree of con¬ 
sequence, as it was enabled to dispute the right of ecclesiastical , 
as it did of civil authority with Canterbury and York, though 
it did not attain the grandeur of either of these two cities for 
nearly three centuries afterwards. The Londoners on the 
accession of the three sons of Sebert, expelled Bishop Mellitus 
and returned to Paganism; the see of London remaining without 
a bishop till the year 653, when King Segbert espousing the 
Christian doctrines, Cedda, or Chad, was advanced to the 
bishopric. In 666 Wulpher, who had sole ecclesiastical 
control in the kingdom of Essex, committed the first act of 
simony in England by selling the bishopric of London to Wina, 
who had been expelled from Winchester: this bishop was suc¬ 
ceeded by Erkenwald, who had received his education under 
Mellitus, and was distinguished for his sanctity, having been 
at the same time the instigator of several religious foundations, 
and a benefactor to the city; on his death the possession of his 
body became an object of dispute on the part of the canons of 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


35 


St. Paul’s and the monks of Chertsey, or according to Rapin’s 
History, of Barking: but the inhabitants of London siding with 
the canons, possessed themselves of the mortal remains of the 
revered bishop, and had them honourably interred in his own 
cathedral, the revenues of which he had enriched, besides 
having extended its buildings. 

A transient gleam of brightness again illumined the prospects 
of the Londoners under the reign of Egbert, who having in 
823 consolidated the seven divisions of the state into one king¬ 
dom, the southern portion of which was designated England, 
he in 833 caused a Witena-Gemot, or council of wise men , 
a Parliament in fact, to be convened at London to deli¬ 
berate on the most effectual means of protecting the island 
from the invasion of the Danes, and it is therefore justly 
inferred, that from this date London became the metropolis of 
the kingdom, though Pennant favours the idea that Alfred 
first constituted it the capital. All the Saxon efforts to repulse 
the Danes proved fruitless, and in 839 they effected a landing 
in Kent, pursuing their victorious route to London which they 
pillaged, massacreing great portion of the citizens. This and 
other successful piratical expeditions, induced them to attempt 
the ultimate subjugation of the island, and in 851 the city w r as 
again reduced beneath the Danish yoke; and finding it a con¬ 
venient garrison for making inroads into the neighbouring states, 
they kept up a constant and irritating system of annoyance and 
spoliation. At length Alfred, with whose chivalrous name and 
exploits is emblazoned on the page of British history all that is 
noble and heroic; in whose reign dawned that liberty of privi¬ 
lege, that right of justice, which as Englishmen we hold as vital 
to the existence of a free-horn citizen, as the air we breathe, 
and from whence emanated that excellent system of municipal 
government, which, with various modifications and improve¬ 
ments, exists at the present day. Alfred feeling that the partial 
establishment of the Danes in the country continued the exciting 

f 2 


36 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


cause of misery and disquietude to his people, and that the 
hostile settlers were regardless of their most solemn oaths and 
treaties, resolved to free his kingdom from the marauders, and 
having repaired his decayed fortresses, suddenly laid siege to 
London, which he forced to capitulate in 884. After improving 
the buildings and strengthening the city’s walls, he appointed 
his son-in-law Ethered, governor, with the title of the Earl 
of Mercia. This nobleman seems to have held the city in lee, 
being vested with more than ordinary authority as governor, and 
had no doubt some tenure of power delegated to him, but which 
is not clearly defined by historians; for on his death, his widow 
Ethelfleda formally delivered up the custody of the city, with 
that of Oxford to her brother, King Edward the Elder. During 
the last-named year Alfred caused several large vessels to 
be constructed on an improved system both as to sailing and 
stowage, which he allowed the merchants of London to hire, 
assisting them also with the loan of money, to undertake length¬ 
ened voyages ; some of these traded to the east, most probably 
to the Levant, and amongst other commodities brought home 
precious stones, with which the regal crown was embellished. 
In 893 Alfred had the mortification of witnessing an extensive 
demolition of his capital by another accidental fire. The wise 
and prudent regulations however of the monarch had already 
made considerable advancement in the mode of building the 
houses, not only by improving the style of their construction, 
but their durability and partial safety against fire, having 
erected his palaces with stone and brick instead of wood. The 
opulent citizens and resident nobility by degrees emulated each 
other in copying this novel and “ wonderous style” of archi¬ 
tecture, though it did not come into general adoption for some 
ages afterwards; but the dwellings from this date became less 
subject to the destructive element which had so frequently laid 
waste the city. 

The restless and ambitious spirit of the Danes, and the rich 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


37 


booty our island afforded, still led them onward with the hope 
of its final conquest. Their hordes therefore again appeared 
off the coast, and effecting a landing near Tilbury, in Essex, 
under the command of Hasten, or Hastings, erected a strong 
fort at Beamfleote, now called South-Benfleet, near the Isle of 
Canvey, from whence they were eventually routed and their 
castle taken by Ethered. So rapidly had proceeded the reno¬ 
vation of the city, and the revival of the spirit of its citizens, 
that they were in a condition, for the first time since the 
departure of the Romans, not only to defend their walls against 
aggression, but to sally forth and meet the invaders ; and under 
the command of Ethered, were by their brave and intrepid 

conduct mainly instrumental in the success of the engagement. 

♦ 

Thus in the earliest records of London it is authenticated, that 
though the inhabitants had become addicted to commercial 
pursuits, they were not incapacitated by their peaceful occupa¬ 
tions from signalizing themselves in the field, when their country 
needed their services, and rendering themselves as conspicuous 
in deeds of arms as they had done in their ability and diligence 
in traffic. Indeed, the heroic acts which distinguished the 
citizens at various periods of our history are so numerous, 
that our limits prevent their constant specification, and therefore 
it is to be inferred, that on all occasions where their presence 
was required, they ever opposed a dauntless front to danger, and 
were as remarkable for their individual courage as they were 
for their loyalty. Fitz-Stephen in eulogizing the citizens says, 
“ they were always glorious in manhood, and notable beyond all 
other citizens in urbanity of manners, attire, table, and talk; 
the matrons being the very modest Sabine ladies of Italy.” 

London, which had claimed the especial regard of Alfred, 
experienced all the benefit which would naturally accrue to a 
city from the direction of a mind embracing in its compre¬ 
hensive grasp the requisites to constitute its possessor a great 
and enlightened statesman : but as neither his authority nor 


38 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


example could be omnipotent, without it had the effect of 
stimulating the spiritless nobility to similar acts of political 
wisdom and patriotic virtue, we find that as he had no model, 
it was some years before he had an imitator. It is uncertain the 
exact character of the civil government of the city at this era, but 
we collect from the “ Saxon Chronicle,” that “ the king moved 
by the importance of the place, and the desire of strengthening 
his frontier against the Danes, restored London to its ancient 
splendour, and observing that through the confusion of the 
times, many both Saxons and Danes lived in a loose and dis¬ 
orderly manner, without owning any government, he offered 
them now a comfortable establishment if they would submit 
and become his subjects. The proposition was better received 
than he expected; for multitudes grown weary of a dissolute 
kind of life, joyfully accepted such an offer.” In continuation 
we do not think it inconsistent to assume, that as Alfred in his 
regulations of the commonwealth dividedthe counties of his king¬ 
dom into hundreds , and tythings, he may have first separated 
the city into wards and 'precincts, and as the king constituted 
the office of Scyre-Gere/a, or Shire-reive, the present sheriff 
of counties, the nature of the office would require a similar 
institution in London, though no record extant establishes 
either of the facts in reference to the metropolis. 

During the succeeding reign of Edward the Elder, the 
welfare of the city which had been based on such admirable 
foundations by the king’s father, continued to reap the advantage 
of his salutary laws ; and on Athelstan, or Adelstan, ascending 
the throne, London attained a brilliant era of prosperity, which 
was not equalled by any other city in the kingdom ; as illus¬ 
trative of which it may be instanced, that in 939, when 
it received the distinguished privilege of coining, a greater 
number of mints were allotted to it, than even Canterbury. 
But the maritime commerce does not seem to have extended 
in proportion to its internal improvement, as in 9*25, Athelstan 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


39 


enacted “ that every merchant who made three voyages to 
the Mediterranean on his own account, should he raised to 
the honour and enjoy the privileges of a gentleman.” The 
monarch resided in the centre of the city, and seems to 
have been endeared to the people, his palace being situated on 
the spot where Addle Street now runs, commencing from No. 
58, Aldermanbury, to Wood Street, Cheapside, and is mentioned 
in ancient records as King Addle Street, and the church of St. 
Alban, in Wood Street, is traditionally related to have been 
founded by him. In 945, during the reign of Edmund I., ano¬ 
ther parliament was held in London for the discussion of eccle¬ 
siastical affairs. Little worthy of note occurred during the sove¬ 
reignties of Edred and Edwy; but after Edgar had been pro¬ 
claimed king, in 959, the fame of the king’s abilities and wise 
administration caused a considerable number of foreigners to 
resort to his capital, but this more intimate intercourse with 
distant nations appears to have been injurious to the morals of the 
inhabitants, drunkenness having become so habitual, that Edgar 
in order to check the vice, instituted a law that within every 
drinking cup of certain dimensions there should be pins fixed 
at particular distances, and if any person was convicted of 
“ drinking beyond the mark” he should be mulcted. 

In 961 the cathedral of St. Paul fell a sacrifice to the flames, 
while a malignant fever proved fatal to a great number of the 
citizens. According to the narrative of several early historians 
St. Paul’s w r as rebuilt during the same disastrous year, which 
would at once lead to the conclusion, that the public buildings 
of London had, even in the tenth century, attained little archi¬ 
tectural importance, and must have been on a small scale, and 
composed of wood. 

It may be noted among the earlier references to agricultural 
subjects, that land in this reign w T as not valued at more than one 
shilling per acre; and among other politic measures adopted 
by Edgar, was the enactment, that the Winchester measure 


40 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


should become the standard of metage. He also ordained that 
one and the same money should be current throughout his 
kingdom, and that the king’s coin was alone to be received; 
though the practice of having private mints was not wholly 
abolished until some time after the Norman conquest. 

The zenith of London, as the Saxon capital had now passed 
its meridian and the state of agitation in which it was kept 
from the reign of Ethelred If. who succeeded Edward the 
Martyr in 979, until the Danes had gained sole possession of 
the kingdom, rendered the chance of any improvement almost 
impracticable; though its commercial interests obtained all the 
attention and protection that the turbulency of the times could 
be expected to permit. At the commencement of the feeble 
and pusillanimous sovereignty of Ethelred, the devoted city was 
again nearly consumed by fire, and had scarcely recovered from 
its desolation, when a powerful Danish armament threatened a 
general invasion ; and in 982 siege was laid to London, but suc¬ 
cessfully repulsed by the gallant citizens. At this date, owing 
in all probability to the partial dread of fire, the greater 
number of the dwellings were outside the city to the west of 
Ludgate, the houses within the walls being irregularly built, 
and few contiguous to each other. 

In 992 a numerous fleet Avas fitted out at London in order to 
prevent the landing of another army of Danes and Norwegians, 
in which the Londoners performed a conspicuous part, and the 
enemy were dispersed. Tavo years afterwards Anlaf and Sweyn, 
or Swegen, kings of Norway and Denmark, appeared before the 
city with a fleet of ninety-four ships with the dire intent of burning 
and sacking it: but to the valour of her own undaunted citizens, 
to their unshaken loyalty, did London at this momentous crisis 
OAve its salvation, and the Danes Avere obliged to raise the siege. 
It appears that if Ethelred had possessed a spark of British 
courage, it would have caught fame from the heroic conduct 
of his faithful citizens, and he might have driven back the 


V 







: 


-•v/- 




: . . 


- 4 - 
















































.. 


• i'.' • ' 

3 • 

* 

. 

' * 

- 

* 

y 

• ' ■ 

■ • 




















• ■ - 










. -■ 

- 

. • 

• : , • . . 

' • » ' i 

- 

• : . 













J 






t 

























s 
























































% 



















HISTORY OF LONDON. 


41 


invaders discomfited to their inhospitable shores, but he had 
recourse to the despicable expedient of purchasing a respite 
by paying a large sum, amounting to 36,540/. in silver, equi¬ 
valent to 400,000/. of the present value of money, and whence 
arose the onerous tax of Danegelt , of which London bore a 
large proportion. The expedient, however, proved only an 
alternative of temporary efficacy; as it was based on pusillani¬ 
mity and inertness, arising from a wish to avoid an imminent 
peril without any personal effort or risk of danger, which could 
have been alone obviated by nervous, instant action, and chivalric 
conduct. In 1013, London being the only city left in possession 
of the irresolute Ethelred, he retired to Normandy; the city, 
deserted by its king, was ultimately induced to open its gates to 
the Danes; and in the same year, Sweyn was proclaimed in 
London king of England, but dying in the spring of the suc¬ 
ceeding year, and his son, Cnut , or Canute, not obtaining the 
affections of the people, Ethelred was recalled, and for a short 
period resumed the reins of government; ending his inglorious 
career in the early part of 1016, his remains being deposited 
in the chancel of the old cathedral church of St. Paul’s. 
During his sovereignty we find the first reference made to the 
exaction of any toll in the port of London on the importation 
of foreign merchandize; it appearing by the Saxon Chronicles, 
that Ethelred when at Wantage fixed certain regulations of 
customs on ships and goods to be paid at the principal quay 
of Belinsgate , Blynesgate, or Billingsgate. In one of the 
clauses allusion is made to the “Emperor’s men coming with 
their ships,” who were accounted worthy of good laws, though 
not allowed to forestall the markets from the burghers of 
London; referring, it would seem, to persons usually residing 
in London. Now, as the German merchants of the Steel-yard 
were very early established here as a trading company, it is 
probable that by the Emperor’s men were designated that 

G 


VOL. I. 


42 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


society, none other than that of the Steel-yard having ever 
existed in the Metropolis. 

Edmund Ironside, who succeeded his father, was unanimously 
elected to the throne, and was the first king crowned in 
London; the coronations having been latterly performed at 
Kingston-on-Thames. The courage and ability of the youth¬ 
ful monarch ought to have insured him the confidence and 
love of his subjects, but the defection of the nobility and 
powerful opposition of the clergy, rendered his cause extremely 
desperate, though it was the occasion of exhibiting another 
striking instance in our city’s history of the loyalty of its 
inhabitants. At this juncture, when the aristocratical and 
clerical influence, an influence which seems ever to have been 
co-existent in history and too frequently combined in the 
cause of oppression, or protection and perpetuity of abuse, 
having transferred its preponderating power in favour of the 
pretensions of the “ Royal Dane,” he was proclaimed by this 
lordly faction king of England. But amidst the gathering 
storm of rebellion, the citizens of London stood dauntless, 
their honour still unimpeached, which they stamped on their 
annals in crimson characters of blood. Canute, apprized of 
the disaffection in the land and his proclamation at South¬ 
ampton, hastened to the Thames with a large fleet, and 
appeared before London with two hundred ships. Finding 
the city impregnable to his attacks on the east, as it was 
enabled to draw succours from the westward, and being- 
prevented passing through the bridge, owing to its fortifica¬ 
tions , he resolved on the Herculean task of cutting a trench 
through the marshes of Surrey, in order to circumvent the 
bridge and bring his ships to bear on the western division of 
the city, thus completing its blockade, his troops having 
invested the walls by land. In this historical event we observe 
the first recurrence to the existence of a bridge across the 











* 




$@!UTMWAK&,CIH1URC1HI & 

























































































■ 1 ■ 




* S 

■ ■ . ■ • 











v ' -■ 




. 

















■ 




- _ ■ . - 

. .' * 


-.5 fr - •• : 








• / 














■ - 




. - - *• . 












































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


43 


Thames, and though no precise data are afforded to determine 
the period of its erection; yet, as King Anlaf, in the year 993, 
is stated to have sailed up the river as far as Staines, ravaging 
the counties on each bank, and in 1016 the progress of 
Canute’s navy was checked by a bridge, it must have been 
constructed within the intervening twenty-three years, and 
during the reign of Ethelred, which is partially corroborated 
by the tenor of the custom-regulations enacted by this 
king, wherein it is recited, that tolls shall be levied on vessels 
coming to Belinsgate or “ad pontem.” According to the 
traditionary account of Bartholomew Linsted alias Fowle, 
the last prior of St. Mary of the Ferry , or St. Mary Overie's 
nonvent in Southwark, he asserts that “ a ferrie was kept in 
a place where now the bridge is builded; at length the ferry¬ 
man and his wife deceasing, left the same ferrie to their only 
daughter, a maiden, named, Marie, which with the goods left 
by her parents, as also with the profits arising of the said 
ferrie, builded a house of sisters, ’u a place where now 
standeth the east part of St. Marie Overie’s church, above 
the Queere, where she was buried, unto the which house she 
gave the oversight and profits of the ferrie; but afterwards the 
said house of sisters being converted into a college of priests, 
they builded the bridge of timber, as all the other the great 
bridges of this land were, and from time to time kept the 
same in good reparations; till at length, considering the great 
charges of repairing the same, there was by ayd of the citizens 
of London and others, a bridge builded with arches of stone.” 
Many learned authorities doubt the truth of this narrative, as 
no record or tradition, except the one cited, is discoverable of 
any convent having existed in Southwark before that of Ber¬ 
mondsey, founded by Alwin Childe in 1082; St. Mary Overie 
having been established in the reign of Henry the First. 
Stow is the only early authority supporting the Prior’s history, 
though in Doomsday-book a reference is made in Southwark 


44 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


to a Monasterium , which it is urged by Bishop Tanner in 
contradistinction to Dugdale, that if it denoted anything more 
than an ordinary church, may be thought to mean this religious 
house. The Prior’s account also is incorrect as to the repairs 
of the bridge, as it is on record, that the expenses were 
defrayed by a public charge. Nor is it likely that a small 
sacred order could have afforded the heavy outlay of its 
erection; but more probably received a consideration and 
allowance for the loss of the profits arising from the ferry, 
which formed its chief support. More probability being attached 
to the suggestion, that the bold enterprize of Anlaf might 
have instigated the citizens and government in building a 
bridge, not only in a political point of view in preventing the 
future invasion of the upper districts of the Thames, but as a 
source of convenience for the more ready egress and ingress 
into the city from Surrey. 

The circuitous extent of the cut or trench through which 
the Danish vessels were towed is not correctly ascertained, 
but its commencement is generally acknowledged to have 
been at Dockhead , by Rotherhithe or Redr iff ; fascines of 
hazels, willows, and other small wood, fastened down with 
stakes, having been discovered in digging the dock in 1694. 
But it is* difficult to subscribe to the opinion formed by 
Maitland:—“ That after diligent search of several days, he 
found the vestigia of the canal to have traversed Rotherhithe 
fields, across the Deptford-road, to Newington Butts; thence 
to the Lambeth-road on the north of Kennington, running 
west and by south through the Spring Garden at Vauxhall 
to its influx into the Thames, at the lower end of Chelsea- 
reach.” No doubt a water-course may have, at some former 
time, existed in this direction; but it is almost incredible that 
Canute would have attempted so needless a labour in exca¬ 
vating such a lengthened canal, of sufficient depth and breadth 
to admit his transports, or that he would have had time to 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


45 


execute the design in an enemy’s country, even if contem¬ 
plated. The supposition is, therefore, more feasible, that from 
Dockhead the cut formed a small semicircle by Margaret’s- 
hill into the Thames by St. Saviour’s-dock. The citizens, 
though now entirely surrounded by the enemy, sustained the 
fury of their assault, and defended themselves with so much 
bravery, that Canute withdrew his army, leaving the fleet to 
preserve the blockade; but his troops on land being defeated 
by Edmund, he was obliged to recall his ships to cover the 
retreat of his own army in case of necessity. During Edmund’s 
absence from England, in order to recruit his army from West 
Saxony, Canute again attacked the city, but in vain, until a 
peace was concluded: and Mercia being ceded to Canute, of 
which London was the capital, the city submitted to the 
Danish dominion. On the assassination of Edmund, Canute 
arrived at the plenitude of his power, and the citizens felt the 
weight of the sovereign’s resentment for their attachment to 
the ancient monarchy. The Danegelt was increased from one 
shilling to seven shillings for every hide of land, equal to about 
100 acres, out of which about a seventh part of the assessment on 
the whole kingdom was imposed on the citizens, an instance 
not only of the disposition of the Danish sovereign, but the 
increased opulence of the city to liquidate so enormous a tax. 
Canute eventually relaxed his severity towards the Londoners, 
and endeavoured to reconcile the people generally to his govern¬ 
ment by his justice and impartiality, and London became 
indebted to him for the extension of its foreign commerce, the 
source from whence has sprung all its splendour. Canute 
scrupulously maintained the codes previously enacted for the 
protection and furtherance of the mercantile interests, and 
directed peculiar attention towards the cultivation of a com¬ 
mercial intercourse, by which the prosperity and security of 
the people might be guaranteed. William of Malmsbury has 
preserved an interesting document, instancing the attention 


46 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Canute paid to the mercantile advancement of his subjects 
during the performance of a pilgrimage to Rome. Addressing 
the authorities left in charge of his kingdom, the king writes: 
—“ I have conversed with the pope, the emperor, and all the 
princes whom I found at Rome, respecting the grievances 
imposed on my subjects, whether English or Danes, on visiting 
their several states, and have insisted that in future they shall 
be treated more favourably, and exempted from the tolls and 
exactions of various kinds with which they have been hitherto 
harassed. The emperor, king Rodolphus, and the other 
sovereigns, have accordingly listened to my remonstrances, and 
have assured me, that henceforth no subject of mine, whether 
merchant or pilgrim , passing through their territories, shall 
meet with any obstruction, or be made liable to the payment 
of any impost whatever.” 

Canute, dying in 1036, did not reap the fruits of his wise 
and politic measures, though at this era the traffic of London, 
and indeed England generally, attained the height of its 
prosperity during its first Millennium : yet how prodigious has 
been its augmentation during the succeeding epoch of only 
eight centuries; what a contrast does the year 1036-37 afford 
with 1836-37; in what strong antithesis is placed the social 
interests of the subject, and the organized state of society in 
Britain. Mr. Hunter has so truly depicted the feelings 
naturally arising in forming any comparative analogy between 
the periods, that we cannot refrain from quoting his words :— 
“We now,” he continues, “ laugh to scorn the idea of invasion; 
the tongue in parliamentary debate, and the pen in political 
pamphlets, are the only weapons of our warfare. Every breath 
of wind carries out or brings home exhaustless mines of treasure; 
the slave becomes free from his master the moment his foot alights 
on these hallowed shores; unnumbered mansions and palaces 
swell the cities and embellish the plains, and golden harvests 
wave on the lately barren wastes.” If we pursue the contrast 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


47 


further, we note that about this period, not any city, except 
London and Westminster, contained 10,000 inhabitants, being 
one seventy-fifth part of the population of the present day, or 
as 20,000 to 1,500,000 ; and that the amount of 10,000 people 
is only now equivalent to the number of retailers of spirits and 
beer within the metropolis; and while the houses within the 
city’s walls and western precincts were then thinly scattered, 
the eye at a single survey being enabled to estimate their 
extent and number, that now there are upwards of 10,000 
courts, alleys, streets, lanes, squares, places, and rows; and 
from the opposite points of their respective situations, no 
individual would pass through them in the space of a whole 
year. It may be added, that in the early part of the 11 th 
century, agriculture was at so low an ebb that land sold at 
equal to four shillings per acre of our present money, which 
was likewise the value of four sheep. 

On the demise of Canute a Witena-gemote was held, (the 
term Parliament, according to Sir Robert Cotton, not occur¬ 
ring until the sixth year of the reign of John,) to which was 
summoned as usual the nobles; and for the first time, in 1036, 
London sent its representatives to the State Council under the 
name of Lidromen , a Saxon designation, the translation of 
which is disputed, being rendered nautce or mariners , but evi¬ 
dently indicating the magistrates or principal merchants of the 
city. At this assembly was discussed the succession to the 
throne, Harold, surnamed Harefoot, son of Canute, being 
elected, during whose short reign and that of his brother, 
Hardicanute, few occurrences took place relative to the city. 
Edward the Confessor, in whom was resumed the Saxon 
dynasty, was recalled from Normandy and declared King of 
England, in the City of London, by the general voice of the 
nation. Two years after his accession, in 1043, a dreadful 
famine prevailed throughout the country, and wheat sold at 
the then exorbitant rate of five shillings per quarter. The 


i 


48 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


bigotry of this king, and his neglect of temporal for spiritual 
affairs, caused him to slight the international interests, and little 
improvement or advance was made in the mercantile prospects 
of London. Though Edward is accused of disregarding the 
existing state of his kingdom, and paying comparatively trifling 
attention to current circumstances, he was not unmindful of 
his own future state in building and endowing churches. He 
re-edified, with architectural magnificence, the monastic pile 
of St. Peter, Westminster, and endowed it munificently, 
granting to it all the rights and privileges which papal 
decrees could enforce. While this royal foundation was 
erecting, Ingilricus and his brother, Edwardus or Gerardus, 
founded, in 1056, a large and beautiful college in St. Martin’s- 
lane, Aldersgate, and endowed it for a dean, and secular 
canons or priests by the name of St. Martin’s le Grand. 

Among the principal laws, however, which Edward did 
enact is a statute, wherein he acknowledges the pre-eminence 
of London over all his cities, confirms to it all its ancient 
customs and usages, so as not to be violated by his successors, 
and particularly grants to the citizens the privilege of holding 
and keeping “ the hustings ,” a court or council, every Monday. 
As additionally illustrative of the condition of society in the 
middle of the 11th century, and the state of London and 
Westminster, may be recounted the history of Godwin, the 
powerful Earl of Kent, and father in law of the king, who by 
base insinuations made to Edward, principally by the Normans 
at court, had been cited to appear before the Great Council 
assembled at London, to investigate the truth of the allega¬ 
tions. Godwin, aware that his ruin was pre-determined, 
refused to attend, unless his personal safety was guaranteed 
by pledges, which being denied, he was banished the country, 
and his estates confiscated. Confident in his own innocence, 
the earl had recourse to arms to enforce the restitution of his 
rights : and having induced many of the citizens to espouse his 






• \ 


























rKIfc 

K; *1 | 






























‘ 












. 















■ion. Punished June 1838. iy tVS.Orr & C’Amen 










































































* 







HISTORY OF LONDON. 


49 


cause, he raised a considerable army, and fitted out a fleet, 
with which he sailed up to London Bridge, and meeting with 
no opposition from the Londoners, passed through the arches 
on the Southwark shore, with the intent of attacking the Royal 
Navy, consisting of fifty sail, lying off Westminster—a fact, 
implying that the ships of war could not have been very for¬ 
midable, as they were enabled to pass and repass with so much 
facility the wooden arches of the bridge. The warlike array, 
however, of the Earl’s army, which had taken a position on the 
southern banks of the river, induced some of the influential 
nobility to interfere as conciliators, and the effusion of native 
blood was spared. Godwin being reinstated in the possession 
of his title and estates, and the Norman courtiers dismissed 
the kingdom. 

During the reign of Edward, we find that the rights and 
privileges of the citizens received their first statutory recognition , 
having previously depended on usage and tradition; but it is 
to be lamented that we cannot recapitulate the nature and 
extent of these liberties, which would be illustrative of the 
immunities which had incited them to commercial operations, 
forming the fundamental principles of that greatness which the 
city has now attained. There is, however, so much romance, 
blended with the few accounts extant 44 of London being after 
the manner of Old Great Troy” that no certainty prevails, 
except that London possessed from time immemorial the noble 
right of conferringyree^om on such slaves and vassals as should 
reside for a year and a day within the city, unclaimed by their 
lords; and hence London received the distinguished appellation 
of 44 The Free Chamber of the King.” Exclusive of the high 
and noble character of this prerogative, it was of inestimable 
value to the mass of the population, as it was the first ray of 
liberty dawning on a people still nearly benighted in the gloom 
of the darker ages; the state of vassalage, being only a slight 
amelioration from that of slavery. It was, therefore, the means 


VOL. i. 


H 


50 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of pointing out to them that there were other sources from 
whence the blessing of freedom could spring, than the caprices 
of their feudatory lords; and so scrupulously did the citizens 
appreciate the privilege which for some time they exclusively 
enjoyed, that cases are on record, of individuals having been 
degraded from the rank of citizens, solely from the circum¬ 
stance of their having descended to hold in villainage lands 
without the limits of the city. 

On the death of Edward the Confessor, in January, 1066, 
Harold, the son of Earl Godwin, was placed on the throne; the 
citizens, in conjunction with some of the nobles and a few of 
the clergy, having been foremost in repelling the claims to the 
succession of William, Duke of Normandy, a descendant of 
Canute. Harold, however, in opposing the advance of the 
Duke’s troops into England, was killed the same year, in the 
battle fought near Hastings. On the approach of the Normans 
to London, the citizens sallied forth, but were repulsed in 
Southwark, and compelled to retreat within their walls. 
This “ courageous onslaught,” however, induced William, after 
destroying Southwark by fire, to march his army into the 
Western counties, fearful in winter of attacking the strong¬ 
hold of the metropolis. Disaffection and treachery among 
the nobles, and intrigues of the clergy, made his eventual 
conquest more easily attainable; and William, on his re-ap¬ 
pearance near the walls, was met by the magistrates and 
citizens, who tendered the city’s keys, and acknowledged him 
sovereign, when he assumed the name of Conqueror. The 
submission of London was effected entirely by internal faction, 
and not the absence of means and power to have withstood the 
siege; the peaceful acquiescence to his rule having been prin¬ 
cipally effected by treaty and compact. But the king seems 
to have been fully aware of the necessity of holding in check the 
gallant spirit of the inhabitants, as one of his first acts was to 
augment and strengthen the fortress of the Tower, and the 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


51 


additions he then made have now become an interesting archi¬ 
tectural relic of his reign. 

Whatever feelings of displeasure or animosity William might 
have harboured against the Londoners for the hostile disposi¬ 
tion they had evinced, he was wise enough to perceive that the 
opulence and commercial importance of the city would act as 
the mainspring to the successful issue of his future political 
designs, and the reconciliation of the citizens was the sure 
method of establishing his dominion on a firmer basis; he, 
therefore, granted to them a written charter, which is now 
preserved with sacred veneration among the archives at 
Guildhall. As it is the first document of the kind the citizens 
are recorded ever to have possessed, it merits a more particular 
description. The charter consists of four lines and a quarter, 
well and legibly written on a slip of parchment, six inches long 
and about one inch broad, in the Saxon character; and not in 
French, which was then beginning to supersede the Saxon, 
the national language. 

<c WILLIAM the King friendly salutes William the Bishop 
and Godfrey the Portreve , and all the Burgesses within London 
both French and English, and I declare , that I grant you to be 
all Law-worthy , as you were in the days of King EDWARD ; 
and I grant that every child shall be his father's heir , after his 
father's days , and I will not suffer any person to do you wrong. 
God keep you." 

To which is attached a seal of white wax, impressed with 
the Conqueror on horseback, and on the reverse, sitting in a 
chair of state; the only words remaining of the superscription 
being M. WILL. In elucidation of this charter it may be 
necessary to remark, that being law-worthy , implied that the 
individual, in all cases of disputed right or alleged crime, 
should be entitled to a legal trial, and not like men under 
vassalage, liable in their persons or possessions to arbitrary 
rule, insuring at the same time the secure transmission of 


52 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


property on the decease of a relative to the nearest of kin; 
whereas, holding lands and goods at the will of feudal lords, 
the owners were never certain that any part of the fruits of 
their industry would be inherited by their relatives and friends. 
The importance of the grant was still further enhanced by 
being given at a time when the feudal system was acquiring a 
firmer and wider range, by the settlement of the Norman 
Barons in England under the military tenure. 

We have now arrived at one of the most eventful periods of 

* 

the history, not only of our island but also of London, when 
the sceptre of the Saxons no longer controlled the destinies of 
the British, and when new characteristics were on the eve of 
influencing the manners and customs of the people. During 
the Saxon rule, the turbulency and disorganized state of 
society had induced the Londoners, in their hours of relaxation 
from business, to apply their attention to those pastimes # 
requiring exertions of bodily strength, which naturally commu¬ 
nicated to the mind a predilection for military pursuits, 
especially as it was likewise the sole occupation of the aristo¬ 
cracy. Emulation was soon created in the youthful breast to 
excel in some of the usual pastimes of the day, as hunting, 
hawking, leaping, running, wrestling, slinging, casting of darts 
and stones, the use of the bow, the club, and the buckler; and 
which, in accordance with the popular taste, far exceeded the 
utility or necessity of mental accomplishments; study, beyond 
that of the ledger, was deemed superfluous, and literature 
thought more congenial to the gloom and retirement of the 
cloister. But the infatuation of gaming, especially with dice, 
had unhappily become too prevalent among all classes; a vice 
which the Anglo-Saxons inherited from their ancestors, as 
Tacitus assures us, the Germans would not only risk their 
whole fortunes on the turn of the die, but even stake their 
personal liberty, the winner having the option of selling the 
loser as a slave. Chess formed another favourite source of 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


53 


amusement, and also backgammon, which is stated to have 
been invented about the tenth century. It is related that 
Bishop CEtheric, having obtained admission to Canute about 
midnight upon urgent business, found the king and his cour¬ 
tiers at play, some at chess, others with dice. At the ter¬ 
mination of the Saxon era, little alteration occurred in the 
people’s pastimes; the Normans only diverting more of the 
popular attention towards jousts and tournaments; and we then 
find, that the sons of the citizens and yeomen practised various 
attacks and evolutions on horseback, and also on foot, as 
running at the quintain , &c., the youth being armed with shields 
and pointed lances, resembling the Indus Trojce, or c< Troy 
game,” described by Virgil, and doubtless the origin of 
tournaments. 

The most destructive fire which had befallen London 
occurred in 1077, and in the succeeding year, William caused the 
present large square tower to be erected, called now the White 
Tower , under the direction of the celebrated military architect 
* Gundulph, Bishop of Rochester, which remains as a noble speci¬ 
men of the prelate’s innovation in the art of castle building. A 
similar plan was adopted by the bishop in the construction of 
Rochester Castle. Fitzstephen designates this tower as the 
Arx Paiatina , or Palatine Tower, the commander having the 
title of Palatine conferred on him, being at the same time 
endowed with regal powers. Within the tower is a chapel, 
which, according to Stow, was coeval with the structure, but 
even in his time was used as a repository for records. 

During the reign of William Rufus , London bore a large 
proportion of the heavy taxes imposed by the king, in order to 
rebuild of wood London Bridge, which had been in great 
measure destroyed by a serious flood occurring in 1091; also for 
the erection of Westminster Hall, and the enlargement of the 
Tower, the king having caused the addition of the castellated 


54 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


building on the south-side facing the Thames, afterwards 
called St. Thomas’s Tower, beneath which is Traitor’s Gate. 

On the accession of Henry I., in the year 1100, to the 
exclusion from the throne of his elder brother Robert, who 
was in Normandy, the king deemed it politic to obtain the 
favour and co-operation of the citizens by granting them the 
confirmation of their prescriptive rights, with additional muni¬ 
cipal advantages. Indeed, throughout the history of our city 
it is observable, that its preponderating importance in the 
state secured to it privileges, which, in the usual course of 
occurrences, no metropolis could have hoped to have attained; 
and the city seems, in a more especial degree, to have pro¬ 
fited by the intrigue, perfidy, schemes, or extravagance of the 
sovereigns, compelling them to require the influence or money 
of the citizens. It was, however, in this reign, that the first 
detailed and circumstantial account is found of the immunities 
enjoyed by the city, contained in a charter of ratification of the 
usages ascertained and established, and which henceforward 
were not to be dictated or regulated by the caprice and humour * 
of favouritism. The charter was granted in the first year of 
Henry’s sovereignty; and besides radicating all former customs, 
added to the city the jurisdiction of Middlesex in fee-farm, 
without homage or other condition than a quit rent of £300, 
with power of appointing a sheriff, and also a justiciary from 
among their own body for holding the pleas of the Crown. 
This sum, however, considering the prosperous condition of 
the country, must have been equivalent to £12,000 of our 
present currency, provisions having since increased at least 
forty-fold; for it appears that Henry, who was more in want 
of money, than sustenance for his army and retainers, ordered 
that his tenants in future, instead of finding bread for a meal 
for a hundred men , should pay in lieu one shilling ; for a stalled 
or fat ox, one shilling; for a night’s feed of oats for twenty 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


55 


horses , fourpence : and for a ram or other sheep, fourpence; 
a pint of wine selling at the London taverns for one penny , 
with bread included ! The citizens became now also exempted 
from Scot and Lot and Daneguild; and were not obliged to 
plead to any charge without their walls ; the rule which is at 
present observed by the king’s courts, of holding sittings in 
each term in Guildhall, being merely the practical result of this 
privilege. They were, from the same date, freed from having 
any of the king’s household, or of the “ king's livery ,” or 
soldiers quartered upon them, with exemption from all toll, 
passage, and lastage, t£ in all parts and sea-ports of the king¬ 
dom.” The stability of their liberties thus guaranteed and 
shielded from the arbitrary will of the king, the citizens were 
desirous of securing their municipal usages, by causing them to 
assume the appearance of legal authority, and converting them 
into written statutes. Hence ££ their arts and mysteries,” which 
had been kept up merely by prescription, became strengthened 
by established fraternities , and gildes of trade and professions; 
the king, however, reserving to his right the nomination of the 
Portreve, or chief officer of the city. Without disputing the 
subject, though not yielding to the assertion, that Secular 
Gilds did not originate with our Saxon progenitors, thinking 
it more probable that the ££ ®lbam” were adopted from 
Germany and not France, it is worthy of remark, that with 
the exception of the Gilda Teutonicorum, or Steel Yard Gild, 
and the ££ Sadlers Gild,” the Tellarij , or Woollen-Cloth 
Weavers’ Gild, is the most ancient in the corporation, as it 
appears on record, that they rendered to the crown a rent or 
ferme for their gilde in this reign; the ££ Baker's company" 
claims also an early rank in antiquity, circumstances which, 
in reference to the two latter, are of themselves a natural 
sequence, food and clothing being the essentials of humanity. 

The religious and charitable spirit of the age began to be 
conspicuously exemplified about this period, by the erection 


56 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


and endowment of various religious fraternities, churches, and 
hospitals, which we shall more fully detail, in narrating the 
past and present state of the different wards. 

On the death of Henry, the contentions for the crown 
between the Empress Matilda or Maud, the daughter of the 
late king, and Stephen, his nephew, fermented by the treachery 
and perjury of the bishops, not only involved the Londoners, 
as partizans, in heavy losses and amercements, but caused 
serious infringements of their charter; while the agitation 
of the times proved adverse to the advancement of commerce. 
But it afforded the citizens a fresh instance of displaying their 
firmness and consistency of conduct, as well as their national 
importance: for when the fortune of Matilda, during a brief 
space, was ascendant, and the citizens were summoned to 
Winchester, to give their concurrence in recognizing Matilda 
Queen of England, they refused to accede, though the council 
of nobles and prelates had tacitly yielded to the proposal 
before their arrival; denying their consent on the ground of 
having, in the first instance, sworn allegiance to Stephen, and 
eventually they were instrumental in restoring the crown to 
the king. 

The fire which occurred during this reign was the 
most grievous with which the metropolis had been visited, 
destroying London Bridge, and great portion of the city, 
together with part of St. Paul’s Cathedral. Another memorable 
circumstance happened in 1140, a total eclipse of the sun, 
which occasioned the good people of London much con¬ 
sternation, dreading that 44 chaos was come againhaving 
then acquired little general knowledge of the law or motion of 
the heavenly bodies. 

It is difficult, amid the romance of this age, to penetrate the 
veil of fiction and legend which conceals the historical facts. 
Fitzstephen, who too frequently indulges in hyperbole, desirous 
of communicating grandeur of effect to the description of his 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


57 


favourite city, states in allusion to the population in the reign 
of Stephen, that at a great review of the King’s troops, London 
sent into the field 60,000 foot, and 20,000 horse soldiers, all 
its own citizens ; whereas, part of these 80,000 men consisted 
of the martial retainers of the various nobles assembled from 
different portions of the country, and part of the Royal forces 
of the King; and therefore little idea is conveyed of the existing 
population. But Peter de Blois, who was Archdeacon of London, 
resident in the metropolis, estimates the number of inhabitants 
at 40,000, an amount more correspondent with probability; 
though still considerable, recollecting that it was composed of 
the people dwelling within the walls. This is the earliest date 
afforded of judging of the extent of the internal power of the 
city, and presents an interesting and important basis on which 
we can construct a comparative analogy of the relative capa¬ 
bilities and resources of the people during the succeeding 
reigns, which intervened, before the first authorized census was 
taken in 1631, and which was ordered by Government in 
anticipation of a dearth; the leading queries requiring a return 
of “ the number of mouths esteemed to be in the city of 
London and Liberty, and what proportion of corn would suffice 
to feed that number by the month.” The result we have 
annexed in a tabular form. 

In reviewing the population of the twelfth and seventeenth 
centuries, for the purpose of ascertaining the extent of 
commerce from the proportionate differences in the total 
amounts between the two periods; however impressed we may 
be with the certainty, that more diligence and perseverance 
were practised by the merchants and dealers of olden times, 
their lives more closely dedicated to commercial pursuits than in 
later years, and that individual exertion was forced to its 
extreme bounds, which would lead to the inference that 
more business was in a proportionate degree transacted in 


VOL. 1. 


i 


58 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the earlier than the later mercantile history of the city; yet 
we must not omit to make allowance for the facilities which 
have from time to time been afforded to commerce by the 
means of machinery; as even the most simple invention, which 
first proved a substitute for manual labour, conferred on the 
people so vast an advantage over their predecessors, that the 
premises become very uncertain for attempting to work out any 
comparative problem. The commerce of Venice, of Amsterdam, 
and of Antwerp, more than rivalled London, nor was it till 
the reign of Elizabeth, that the British flag was wafted over every 
sea, and that British merchants and British produce were found 
at the marts of the most distant climes. In the ensuing reign 
the foundation of the colonies in America, gave a powerful 
impulse to trade, which was still farther promoted by the free 
and liberal institutions established at the Revolution; and 
England and its metropolis began to occupy a foremost rank 
among the European powers as a commercial and manufac¬ 
turing nation. It was not, however, until towards the close 
of the eighteenth century, that the mighty revolution was 
effected in commerce, which was to place London on the 
pinnacle of its mercantile glory, nullifying all previous calcu¬ 
lations of gradationary aggrandizement. This wonderful epoch 
in trade, was effected by the invention of Hargreaves , in 1767, 
of the spinning jenny , for the manufacture of cotton, of the 
spinning frame by Wyatt, for which Arkwright took out a 
patent in 1769; by the invention of the mule , by Crompton, 
succeeded by the power loom of Dr. Cartwright, and other 
improvements, the whole being stimulated by the application 
of steam power to machinery; added to which, the supply of 
the raw material by the invention of Whitney’s machine for 
separating and cleansing the cotton from the pod, enabling the 
Americans to meet the rapidly increasing demand, all co¬ 
operated in returning the enormous products exhibited by the 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


59 


following figures; the success of the different inventions 
strikingly exemplifying how essential each individually was for 
the completion of the grand result, so true is it, “ Omnes artes 
quce ad humanitatem pertinent, liabent quoddam commune vincu¬ 
lum, et quasi coynatione quadam inter se continentur” From these 
ever memorable periods manufactures and commerce, wealth and 
population, have increased in a ratio far exceeding all human 
anticipations, and have been the means of rendering the British 
capital the largest exporting and consuming city in the world, 
and, with the exception of Pekin and Nankin, the most 
populous. The annexed short summary will exhibit the 
magnitude of our exporting capabilities at the different periods 
referred to. The earliest historical allusion to cotton manu¬ 


facture in England is in the year 1641, and the first authentic 
account of the imports of cotton wool previous to the improve¬ 
ment in the manufacture, is from the year 1697. 




Official value of Exports of 

Years. 

Raw Cotton imported. 

Cotton manufactures, Cotton- 


Twist, and Yarn. 


lbs. 

a 

1697 

1,976,359 

5,915 

1701 

1,985,868 

23,253 

1751 

2,976,610 

45,986 

-it-inA JThree years previous to 
1 /OT (Hargreaves' invention. 

3,870,392 


a >-jnc) ( Three years after 

A ‘ ( Arkwright's patent. 

4,764,589 

355,060 

1780 

6,766,613 

1790 

31,447,605 

1,662,369 

1800 

56,010,732 

5,854,057 

1810 

132,488,935 

18,951,994 

1820 

151.672,655 

22,531,079 

1830 

263,961,452 

41,050,969 

1836 

406,959,057 

58,520,876 


Recurring again to the subject of population, much exag¬ 
geration and absurd theory have existed, at various times, 
respecting the number of the inhabitants of the city; and even 
so late as the year 1683, Sir William Petty, f. r. s., and 














60 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


who was considered on some points an authority, gravely 
asserts, in an essay he wrote on 44 Political Arithmetic concerning 
the Growth of the City of London, with the Measures, Periods, 
Causes, and Consequences thereof,” 44 That as in the year 1840 
the population of London would grow to 10,718,880, it 
must stop before that period, and be at its greatest height in 
1800, when it would be eight times greate/ than now;” the 
estimated population being then 669,930, which would give a 
product of 5,359,440, and the mode of calculation adopted by 
the author is seriously s tated to have been 44 necessary to justify 
the Sci'iptures and all other good histories concerning the number 
of people in ancient times;” yet though we are now in the 
19th instead of the 17th century, hbw little is still known 
of the laws which govern and influence the animal economy of 
man. The above extract also fully illustrates the dangerous 
consequence of erroneous data, and proves how essential it is 
to endeavour to wean the public mind from the hitherto 
controlling influence of mere assertions, opinions, and vague 
generalities, and from giving too willing credence to abstract 
reasoning. It is, however, with pleasure we perceive a 
growing avidity to seize hold of facts, especially when conveyed 
through the valuable medium of statistical knowledge, which 
enables the inquiring mind, from comparative results, to gain 
by direct and certain means sterling information, qualifying 
society more readily to balance, duly regulate and scrutinize 
the complications emanating from the machinery necessarily 
attendant on the relative position and workings of so dense 
a mass of population. But at present our statistical know¬ 
ledge of trade is more incidental to our fiscal regulations, more 
confined to the object of taxation, as applicable to the revenue, 
than prosecuted with the view to the advancement of civilization, 
and developing the combined resources of the nation; and when 
we reflect that this important science comprehends the materials 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


61 


on which alone we can with safety found our deductions respect¬ 
ing the soil, climate, population, and the internal and external 
connexions of the country; the state of its physical, technical, 
intellectual, and moral culture, its constitution and government, 
we must join in expressing our surprize, with others of our 
contemporaries, that in this age so many are still found who 
exclusively indulge their appetite for works of fiction and 
imagery, and <£ starve their reasoning faculties by abstaining 
from the rich nourishment” afforded by statistical information. 

We have been induced to make this short digression, and 
dwell with more attention on the subject, being deeply im¬ 
pressed with its importance; as in evidencing the augmentation 
of the inhabitants of a city or country, we are affording incon¬ 
testable proof of the growth and vigour of its constitution, of 
the waxing strength of its sinews and muscles of war, its 
power to resist any invasion of its rights, and to promote and 
consolidate its commercial and political prospects. 


Cities of 

London, Westminster, 
and Suburbs. 

1631. 

1801. 

1811. 

1821. 

1831. 

Popu¬ 

lation. 

Houses 

Popu¬ 

lation. 

Houses 

Popu¬ 

lation. 

Houses 

Popu¬ 

lation. 

House 

S 

Popu¬ 

lation. 

Houses 

London, within the walls, 
London, without the walls, 

Total of London 

Southwark, - 
Inns of Court, 
Westminster, 

Out Parishes, 

Total of Metropolis, 

73,126 

57,142 

12,000 

74,594 

53,027 

9,985 

6,523 

55,484 

63,629 

8,158 

7,949 

56,174 

67,714 

7,938 

7,826 

55,778 

66,634 

8,002 

7,546 

130,268 

— 

127,621 

16,508 

119,113 

16,107 

123,888 

15,764 

122,412 

15,548 

— 

— 

67,448 

1,907 

153,272 

514,597 

10,933 

1,230 

17,462 

75,017 

72,119 

1,796 

162,085 

654,433 

11,802 

1,306 

17,555 

94,962 

85,905 

1,546 

182,085 

832,270 

12,477 

1,406 

18,502 

116,532 

91,501 

1,271 

201,842 

1 , 054,915 

13,430 

1,187 

20,616 

145,885 

— 

— 

864,845 

121,150 

1 , 009,546 

141,732 

1 , 225,694 

164,681 

1 , 471,941 

196,666 


The numerical results of the above tables afford, on com¬ 
parison, some remarkable details. We have omitted the 
population of the city between the years 1135 and 1154, which 
we have shown was estimated at 40,000, though necessary to 
be kept in view. From these dates to 1631, a space of five 
centuries, an apparent diminution took place in the city 
of London, and during the present century the decrease has 

























































62 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


continued, and thus paradoxically, as the prosperity advanced, 
the population has fallen off; but the fact is, that exclusive 
of the late improvements in the city, as the widening streets, 
enlarging buildings and wharfs, the habit of only resorting 
to the counting-houses during hours of business, and 
returning at night to the suburban or country-houses, has 
so much increased, that the cause of the fluctuation is 
readily accounted for within the walls, while the population 
has become more condensed without the older precincts of the 
wards; the population of the whole metropolitan district having 
augmented, between 1801 and 1831, from 864,845 to 1,471,941 
or more than 70 per cent.; but having within the walls decreased 
more than 25 per cent.; and from a comparison of the houses 
in London at the two periods, we find that there were 773 
persons in 100 houses in 1801, and 787 in 1831. 

During the reign of Stephen’s successor, Henry the Second, 
a more enlightened and liberal political view was taken of civil 
society, which became the fruitful source of benefit and ad¬ 
vantage to the various towns and cities, and more especially to 
London, being the means of communicating a fresh stimulus 
to its home and foreign traffic. This desirable improvement 
in the social state of the country was instigated by the 
arbitrary and imperious conduct of the barons, whose feudal 
sway not only impeded the progress of commercial intercourse 
and adventure, but threatened at times the freedom and in¬ 
dependence of the throne itself. The antiquarian, Selden, 
informs us, that Henry after his accession demolished 1115 
castles, which had been erected during the civil wars of Stephen 
and Matilda. This reduction of the strongholds of feudalism 
was succeeded by the adoption of a new system of creating a 
revenue and levying a military force, free from the despotic 
will of the nobles, by granting charters and sundry privileges 
to the principal towns, in consideration of their paying certain 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


68 


sums of money or an annual fine or tallage to the crown, 
which, while it restrained the power of the barons and feudal 
lords and weakened the general system of their tenure, was 
highly instrumental in fostering and encouraging trade. 

Irrefutable evidence is adduced during Henry’s reign, that 
some radical reform was demanded in the moral state of so¬ 
ciety, the civic authorities retaining little or no influence in 
controlling the unruly spirits of the age. Midnight brawls, 
robberies, and murders, being of frequent occurrence in the 
streets of London, and the committal of these depredations 
and crimes, not confined to the lower and more depraved 
classes, but the sons of wealthy citizens, and even citizens 
themselves, being found among these predatory gangs. John 
Senex , a rich, and, previously considered, a reputable merchant, 
was convicted of burglary, and “ offered for his pardon the 
prodigious sum of 500 pounds weight of silver, which was 
rejected, and he was hanged according to his deserts.” 

Another striking instance is exhibited in the Royal charter 
granted to the city, which after confirming the immunities 
bestowed by Henry the First, renders the citizens free from 
certain fines, such as Jcresgive and Scotale , the former being 
a bribe given to the king’s or other officers for connivance 
and being favourable in their respective judicial duties ; 
and the latter exactions made by the king’s officers who 
kept alehouses, invited the people to drink, and fraudulently 
extorted money from them under pretence of preventing 
their informing against them for some imaginary crimes; 
and <£ these villainous practices were countenanced by some 
great men, the citizens requiring a special clause in their 
charter to liberate them from their continuance.” 

The growing opulence of the merchants, the advancement 
of the arts, and improvement in public and private buildings, 
now induced the citizens to contemplate the plan of substi- 


04 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


tuting a stone in place of the wooden bridge across the 
Thames, the latter requiring constant repair and incurring 
heavy expense. In briefly alluding, however, to the im¬ 
provement in the private buildings of this period, it does 
not appear that the comforts in the domiciles of the worthy 
citizens had arrived at any luxurious extent; for in the 
following reign of Richard the First, houses of stone or brick 
were very limited in number, being still composed of timber 
covered with reeds or straw. But their insecurity from de¬ 
predation and liability to destruction by fire, led to the issue 
of an order in 1191, for settling any dispute arising from 
the enclosure of ground and erecting new houses , the party- 
walls of which were to be made of stone and at least sixteen 
feet in height and three in thickness, which would imply 
that much space was not allowed in the altitude of 44 these 
more commodious” residences. These dimensions were to be 
regulated by jurats, consisting of twelve aldermen, 44 chosen 
in full hustenge, who decided and appeased all the con¬ 
tentions in question.” 

The stone bridge was commenced in the twenty-second year 
of the reign of king Henry the Second, in the year 1176, and 
the site chosen rather to the westward of the original bridge, 
which abutted Botolph’s Wharf. The event was looked 
forward to with so much interest, that the king, clergy, 
and laity, subscribed funds for its completion, and a tax 
was imposed on wool towards defraying the expenses, which 
occasioned the vulgar belief that 44 the bridge was built on 
woolpacks.” The great architect of the day, Peter , of Cole- 
church , was employed to superintend the construction; this 
clergyman, who had attained much skill in architecture, was 
minister of St. Mary, Cole-church. The church, previous to 
the fire of London, in 1666, forming the western corner of 
the Old Jewry, having received its latter appellation from its 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


65 


founder, who was named Cole; the parish being now united 
to that of St. Mildred, Poultry. The Reverend Architect 
did not live to complete his great undertaking, for among 
the records in the Tower, is a letter, dated in the third 
year of the reign of King John, recommending <£ The learned 
and worthy clerk, Isenbert , as a proper person to finish the 
bridge;” he having superintended the erection of the bridges 
of Xainctes and Rochelle; though the bridge at Rouen, built 
by King John’s grandmother, the Empress Matilda, which 
remained in use 500 years, seems to have formed the model 
of that of London. But the citizens appear not to have paid 
much attention to the Royal recommendation, as no historical 
notice is made of Isenbert’s labours, the superintendence of 
the work having been entrusted to Serle Mercer , William 
Almaine , and Benedict Botewrite , merchants, tc who finished 
the first stone bridge in London in the year 1209.”* 

* In addition to the remarks we have already made in reference to the 
first construction of this bridge in the reign of Ethelred, we would here 
allude to a passage found in the works of Snorre, detailing an occurrence 
that seems generally to have escaped historical notice, or to have been con¬ 
founded with the expeditions of Canute, and which recounts a successful 
attack against the wooden bridge of London, previous to its assault by 
Canute at the time the Danes were in possession of the city. The 
enterprise is stated to have been undertaken by Olaf, chieftain of a band of 
Northern adventurers, at the instigation of Ethelred. The bridge was 
partially destroyed, by the piles of some of the middle arches having been 
broken or torn away, and the besieged obliged to retreat, some into the city, 
and others taking refuge in the South-works, or fortifications, vulgo dictum 
Sudverkium. Snorre supports his narrative by citing contemporary war- 
songs, descriptive of the exploit, adding, that Olaf, who was afterwards king 
of Norway, became converted to Christianity, and being massacred by his 
Pagan subjects, was eventually canonized, and a church in Southwark near 
the bridge named after him St. Olavus, in memorial of his success. Torfoeus 
repeats this legend, and proceeds to prove that Olaf never co-operated with 
Canute. 


VOL. 1. 


K 


66 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Previous to the demise of Peter of Colechurch, “ a chapel 
of beautiful arched structure,” dedicated to St/. Thomas, had 
been erected at his own expense on the east side of the 
ninth pier from the north end, and endowed by him for two 
priests, four clerks, &c., and where, according to Stowe, the 
architect himself was afterwards buried. The chapel, which 
communicated with the water by a circular flight of steps 
round one of the pillars of the bridge, remained nearly 
in its original form until the total demolition of the 
houses. The century had however not elapsed, before 
the bridge had become so ruinous from various accidents, 
such as destruction of the starlings, and five of the arches 
“ being borne down by the ice and floods,” that according 
to the tenour of a brief granted in 1280, by King Edward 
the First, “ unless it be speedily repaired it must inevitably 
foil down, and the great numbers of inhabitants dwelling 
thereon are in great danger of being destroyed;” proving, 
at the same time, that from its earliest date, houses were 
erected on it; and which, by King John’s letter of recom¬ 
mendation, it was purposed that Isenbert should cause to 
be erected; the rents to be appropriated to the repairs. 
On the north side was constructed a draw-bridge, de¬ 
fended by a Tower, which proved the means of repulsing 
Fawconbriclge in his assault on the city in 1471, and checked 
also the ill-devised insurrection of Sir Thomas Wiat in the 
reign of Queen Mary, besides that, this division of the 
bridge facilitated the progress of masted vessels up the 
river, especially those laden with provisions bound to Queen- 
hithe. On the top of the Tower were wont to be affixed 
the heads or parts of the bodies of different partizans who 
were hostile to the reigning Government, or who had had 
recourse to arms to enforce redress for their real or imaginary 
grievances. As late as 1598, Hentzer, the German traveller, 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


67 


counted more than thirty heads. On the bridge was situated 
one of the early gates of the city, though it is not specified 
by Fitzstephen. The houses at different periods suffered 
much damage by fire, and in the general conflagration in 
1666 , were, with the exception of a few of the original 
buildings on the Southwark side, entirely destroyed; they 
were, however, soon rebuilt and constructed four-stories high. 
These houses overhung the arches, many of which they even 
nearly concealed, or left little visible to the passing eye beyond 
rude piers. The street thus formed, was about twenty-feet 
in width, and dangerous to foot-passengers from the number 
of carriages, as no direct foot-path was formed, while several 
arches of timber crossed the street from the tops of the 
houses, to prevent the probability of their falling into the 
eddying tide beneath, whose constant roar of water, varied at 
times with the shrieks' of the numerous beings whose lives 
were sacrificed in passing through the ill-constructed arches, 
must have required considerable nerve and long usage, 
especially in the fair occupants of the houses, to have 
rendered their minds free from all dread and apprehension. 
Latterly most of the houses were tenanted by pin and needle 
makers, and “ oeconomical ladies were wont to drive from the 
St. James’s end of the town to make cheap purchases.” 
Fuller , in his “ Worthies” tells us, that Spanish needles 
were made first in London in Cheapside, by a negro, who 
died without communicating the art; but Elias Krowse , a 
German, in the reign of Elizabeth, was more liberal, and 
first taught the method to the English. Fuller facetiously 
gives the derivation of the name needle, quasi ne idle. 

In the reign of Elizabeth, mills and water-works were 
erected under the arches of the south end; the former for 
grinding corn, and to rectify the price of manufacturing flour 
in times of dearth, and the exorbitant rates demanded at such 


68 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


times for meal, by “ Badgers , or Mealmen ; ” and in the year 
1582, Peter Morice, a Dutchman, contrived a water engine, 
to supply the citizens with Thames water, the wheels being 
moved by the common tide-stream. The machinery was im¬ 
proved by Saracold and Hadley, and ultimately occupied four 
of the arches; with sufficient power, it was calculated, to raise 
46,896 hogsheads of water per day, to the height of 120 feet. 

The civic authorities, owing to the numerous lives that were 
lost, from the narrowness of the arches and the immense size 
of the starlings, which occupied one-fourth of the water-way, 
and occasioned a fall, at low water, of Jive feet , creating a 
number of temporary cataracts, besides that the annual repairs 
had for several years amounted to £2,000, came to the resolu¬ 
tion in 1746, to pull down the houses; for which purpose an 
Act of Parliament was passed in 1756, for carrying the plan 
into immediate execution; and the two centre arches of the 
old bridge were thrown into one, in which state the bridge 
remained till its total demolition, in 1831. Reverting to the 
period when the houses were erected after the fire of 
London, the bridge, according to the eulogists of the 
day, was the admiration of all beholders, being the most 
stately erection in the world. 

“ Let the whole earth now all the wonders count; 

This bridge of wonders, is the paramount. ” 

Its praises and fame were sung and recounted by poets and 
historians; yet had these panegyrists witnessed the present 
bridge, we know not what language they would have found to 
have celebrated with its due meed of praise, the magnificence, 
elegance, and beauty of this clief d’oeuvre of pontifical architec¬ 
ture ; and in order to place in juxta-position the dimensions 
and public convenience of the two bridges, we have annexed 
the following tabular account; adding the similar particulars 
of the five other splendid structures crossing the majestic 























































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


69 


Thames, enabling a comparative view at once to be taken of 
their respective proportions. 


Bridges. 

Length. 

Width. 

Height. 

No. of Arches. 

Span of centre. 

Materials. 

Commenced. 

1 

Opened. 

• 

Architects. 

Waterway. 


feet. 

feet. 

feet. 

— 

feet. 





feet. 

Old Bridge. 

Altered by Mr. 

930 

20 

40 

19 

70 

Stone & 
rubble. 

1176. 

1209. 

Peter, of 
Colechurch. 

r 

Above 

Starlings, 

540. 

Dance & Sir 
R. Taylor. 

j ~ 

48 

— 

20 

— 

— 

— 

— 

1 

Below, 

273. 

New Ditto. 

920 

56 

55 

5 

150 

Granite. 

15 Mar. 
1824. 

Aug. 1, 
1831. 

Sir J. Rennie. 

690. 

Westminster. 

1066 

42 

58 

15 

76 

Portland 

stone. 

Jan.1739 

1750. 

Labelye, a 
Swiss. 

820. 

Blackfriars. 

1000 

42 

62 

9 

100 

Ditto. 

June, 

1760. 

1770. 

R. Mylne. 

793. 

Vauxhall. 

809 

36 

— 

9 

78 

Iron & 
granite. 

May, 

1811. 

July, 

1816. 

Jas. Walker. 


Waterloo. 

1326 

42 

54 

9 

120 

Cornish 

granite. 

Oct. 

1811. 

March, 

1817. 

Sir J. Rennie. 

1080. 

Southwark. 

700 

42 

53 

3 

240 

Iron. 

Sept. 

1814. 

1819. 

Ditto. 

660. 


Before concluding the history of our once famed bridge, we 
must relate the heroic conduct of Edmund Osborne , and which 
has formed the subject of more than one legendary theme. 
About the year 1536, Sir William Hewet, afterwards Lord 
Mayor, inhabited a house on the bridge, carrying on the trade 
of a clothworker. The nursery-maid was standing at an open 
window overlooking the river, with Sir William’s only daughter 
in her arms, when the child sprung from her hold and fell into 
the “whirling pool” beneath. The merchant’s apprentice, the 
youthful Osborne, witnessed the melancholy catastrophe, and 
with knightly bravery plunged into the “ mighty rush” of 
waters, rescuing the sinking infant from a premature grave. 
As the fair maiden grew to womanhood, her hand and 
dowry were sought for by courtiers and nobles, and among 
others, by the Earl of Shrewsbury; but Sir William, ever 
grateful to his apprentice for preserving the being in whom his 
fondest hopes were concentrated, decided in favour of Osborne, 
saying, “Osborne saved her , and Osborne shall possess her;” 



























70 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


a decision by no means adverse to the pretty maiden’s wishes. 
Osborne, inheriting the wealth of his father-in-law, became 
Sheriff in 1575, and Lord Mayor in 1582, and founder of the 
noble and ducal house of Leeds. 

We must again recur to the time of Henry the Second, as it 
supplies us with some other interesting facts worthy of com¬ 
ment. We find that the Heavers' Company had a confirmation 
of their guild from the king, “ with all the freedom and 
customs they had in his grandfather’s days,” Henry the First; 
and Stowe quotes a charter purporting, that <c if any cloth 
were to be found made with Spanish wool, mixed with 
English wool, the chief magistrate of the city should have it 
burnt;” which implies that the early woollen clothes used in 
England, were composed entirely of Spanish wool. About 
the middle of this reign, the importation of wine from Bor¬ 
deaux first took place ; and so great was the spirit of 
commercial enterprize, that several fraternities were incor¬ 
porated without the Royal letters patent, being styled Adul¬ 
terine Guilds , and were ultimately, in 1180, amerced to the 
king, for their “ presumptuous proceedings.” These guilds 
are designated, either from the name of their alderman, or 
their trade, and, in some instances, from their patron saint or 
locality; and, as it is to be surmised that only a portion 
of these companies subjected themselves to penalty by an 
infringement of the law, it bears out Glanville’s remarks, that 
at this period guilds were common institutions. Madox 
furnishes us with a curious account of the current value of 
commodities: an ox selling at 4s.; a working horse at the 
same rate; a sow, Is.; a sheep with fine wool, 10^., and ditto, 
coarse, Qd .; 33 cows, and 2 bulls, were purchased at £8. 7s.; 
500 sheep, £22. 10s.; 15 brood mares, £2. 12s. 6d .; and 22 
hogs, £l. 2s.; and, according to Bishop Fleetwood, 4 hens 
were valued at 2 d., and a ram at 8 d. 































I 

















































































* 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


71 


The knight-errant spirit of Richard the First, led him 
into gross inconsistencies, and regardless of his nation’s 
welfare, he, in too many instances, bartered the property of 
the crown in order to enable him to indulge his romantic 
prepossession of wresting the Holy Land from the dominion 
of the Infidels. London, however, through its wealth was 
enabled to profit by the occasion, and to purchase of the king 
some valuable immunities; among others the right of the 
removal of the ivears in the river Thames, whereby the 
navigation became much improved, and as an additional 
encouragement to the citizens, the king resigned all his 
right to the annual duties arising therefrom. From this 
year, 1197, the city claims its jurisdiction and conservancy 
of the river Thames, which it has preserved to the present 
day, extending up the river as far as Staines, and as low 
down as the small Port of Leigh, in Essex, near Canvey 
Island; a right which, according to modern notions of reform, 
<£ would be more honoured in the breach than in the 
observance;” as it is doubtful whether the ownership of the 
river ought now to be confined to any local authority to which 
it might have been granted, particularly when that authority 
constituted in fact the whole metropolis; and it is an 
important question, whether the jurisdiction and conservancy 
of the river Thames, to the preservation of the navigation of 
which the empire owes so much of its greatness, and which is 
of the utmost importance, not only to the contiguous in¬ 
habitants, but those in all other parts of the dominions, is 
properly within the province of any local municipality, and 
why the administration should not be under the direct 
control of the general Executive Government of the country. 

The gracious favour with which Richard regarded the 
citizens was most probably actuated by their loyalty during 
his absence abroad, and the ready liberality with which they 


72 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


contributed towards his ransom, when detained a prisoner in 
Austria, on his return from his chivalrous expedition into 
Palestine. One of the last acts of his reign, exhibiting the 
confidence he reposed in their integrity and wisdom, was in 
1198, when he committed to the sheriffs of London and 
Middlesex, the execution of a plan for affixing a standard of 
weights and measures for the regulation of the whole kingdom. 
In the above year, wheat, owing to the failure of the crops, 
advanced as high as 18s. 4 d. per quarter. 

At this period so great was the increasing political im¬ 
portance which the citizens had acquired in the State, 
that when John, earl of Moreton, Richard’s brother, and 
afterwards himself king, had assembled the bishops and 
nobles, in order to devise the means of resisting the tyrannical 
conduct of Longchamp, bishop of Ely, chancellor of the 
kingdom, and one of the regents during the absence of 
Richard abroad, he convoked a commission of the citizens , and 
by the unanimous resolve of the meeting, Longchamp was 
degraded; the bishop having incurred the displeasure of 
the citizens by the arbitrary encroachments on their limits, 
in forming an embattled wall and fosse around the Tower, 
which latter he connected, as at present, with the river, 
having destroyed the mill belonging to the hospital of St. 
Catherine, standing on the spot now called the Irongate, and 
appropriated the ground from the White Tower to the 
Postern-gate, besides other small parcels of land. 

The chief magistrate of the city, who officiated as butler 
at Richard’s coronation, in the year 1189, was then first 
allowed to assume the title of bailiff, and though the honour 
of presenting wine to his Majesty at this regal ceremony 
was also claimed by the chief magistrate of Winchester, 
both referring to previous custom, yet the office was confirmed 
to London on a free gift of 200 marks, and lias been claimed 


































































































. 












' • 


. 












. 

. 

* '' » ■ > 5 . 

‘ • 1 • „ * V 

. 

• ■ ■ '• 

* • 7 . . .. „ . 








' ' ■ i 


■ 






-- - ■ 

* • 


... ; * 
i 1 ■ • • 

( _ r i- 

, • • •• ' 




































Z 



















HISTORY OF LONDON. 


73 


in perpetuity by prescription, the Mayor receiving as per¬ 
quisite the golden cup containing the wine, and likewise a 
golden ewer of the same precious metal. Fitz-Alwyn, who 
had been nominated bailiff, was vested by the King, two 
years afterwards, that is in 1191, with the rank of Mayor, the 
title with its functions being borrowed from the Norman 
Maire, though it was not till the reign of John, a.d. 1213, 
that the charter was granted permitting the citizens to elect 
their chief magistrate from their own corporate body, and 
allowing them to remove him from the office at the expiration 
of twelve months. 

Before animadverting on the progressive improvement of 
the city during the 13th century, we must endeavour partially 
to familiarize ourselves with its local 'character and that of the 
environs, as well as the state of society at the close of the 
twelfth century. We are afforded the means of correctly 
ascertaining these interesting points by consulting the works 
of Fitzstephen, who lived at that period in the service of 
Archbishop Becket, and having written his patron’s bio¬ 
graphy, has introduced a short but graphic description 
of London, the native place of the Archbishop, which being 
professedly the earliest account extant, merits our marked 
attention. It appears that the city was connected by an 
irregular line of houses along the strand of the river with the 
village of Charing, proceeding thence to the King’s Palace at 
Westminster, a distance reckoned at about two miles. In this 
line of communication were situated the houses of different 
noblemen and wealthy citizens, who had spacious and 
beautiful gardens, some running to the borders of the 
Thames, planted with trees and flowers. The northern 
suburbs were composed of corn-fields, pastures, and delightful 
meadows, intersected with pleasant streams, “ on which,” in 


VOL. i. 


L 


74 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the words of our author,* 44 stands many a mill, whose clack 
is so grateful to the ear. Beyond them an immense forest 
extends itself, beautified with woods and groves, and full of 
lairs and coverts of beasts and game, stags, bucks, boars and 
wild bulls. The fields are by no means of a hungry gravelly 
soil or barren sands, but may vie with the fertile plains of 
Asia, as capable of producing the most luxuriant crops, and 
filling the barns of the hinds and the farmers 4 with Ceres’ 
golden sheaf.’ Around the city, and towards the north, arise 
certain excellent springs at a small distance, whose waters 
are sweet, salubrious, and clear, the rivulets murmuring 4 o’er 
the shining stones.’ Amongst these, Holy-well, Clerkenwell, 
or Fons Clericorum , and St. Clement’s well, are most esteemed 
and best frequented both by scholars from the schools and the 
youths and maidens of the city.” * 

It is not our province to attempt any lengthened disqui¬ 
sition on the rise or fall of the drama, nor to trace the grada¬ 
tions in this country, from the early and rude efforts of the 
followers of Thespis , to the classic transition effected by the 
disciples of JFschylus and Aristophanes; but still it is per¬ 
tinent to our history, in exemplifying the manners of the 
period we are more especially alluding to, that we should 
cursorily describe the scenic representations which gratified 
the public taste, as theatrical performances are generally 
indicative of the 44 ruling passion ” of the day, depicting, in 
forcible colouring, the intellectual or vitiated propensities 
of the people. Fitzstephen mentions that the theatrical 
exhibitions then in vogue were called 44 Miracles” consisting 
of sacred dramas, descriptive of the miracles wrought by the 
holy confessors, and the sufferings by which the faith of 

* This description is collated from the five MS. copies known as 
authentic. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


75 


martyrs was manifested; the stages were fitted up in the 
churches, the ecclesiastics and their scholars the actors, and the 
capce chorales and other pontificals serving as dresses. These 
pieces afterwards acquired the name of “ Mysteries” the most 
mysterious subjects of Scripture being chosen for the compo¬ 
sition ; and Dugdale states, “ for the performance of these 
plays they had theatres for the several scenes very large and 
high, placed upon wheels, and drawn to all the eminent parts 
of the city for the better advantage of the spectators.” 

By availing ourselves of a convenient figure in rhetoric, 

* which enables the logician to take “ a part for the whole,” 
we shall be enabled to avoid prolixity, and yet give the reader 
a general idea of the prevailing characteristics of these 
scriptural plays, by the detached portion we have selected 
from the ancient and celebrated Mystery of “ Corpus Christi , 
or Ludus Coventrice” The prologue to this curious drama 
was recited by three actors, called vexillators , and comprised 
the argument of the several pageants or acts that composed 
the piece, and which amounted to no less than forty , each of 
these acts referring to some particular subject from Holy 
Writ, beginning with the creation of the universe, and con¬ 
cluding with the last judgment. In the first pageant, or act, 
the Deity is represented seated on his throne alone on the 
stage, delivering a speech of forty lines, beginning— 

“ ‘ Ego sum de Alpha et Omega, principium et finis.' 

My name is knowyn God and Kynge, 

• r 

My worke for to make now wyl I wende, 

In myself restyth my reyneynge, 

It hath no gynnyg ne non ende.” .... 

The angels then enter singing, from the Church service, “ To 
thee all angels cry aloud,” &c. Lucifer next makes his ap¬ 
pearance, and demands whether the hymn was chanted in 
honour of God or of him ? The good angels readily reply in 


76 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


honour of God; the evil angels incline to worship Lucifer, 
and he presumes to seat himself on the throne of the Deity, 
who commands him to depart from heaven to hell, which 
dreadful sentence he is compelled to obey, and with his 
wicked associates descends to the lower regions. These 
representations at times continued for three days, and some¬ 
times longer. A play performed at Skinner’s Wells, near 
Smithfield, was endured for eight days, displaying most of the 
historical events of the Old and New Testaments, and was 
well attended throughout by great part of the nobility and 
gentry. The dulness and length of these performances re¬ 
quired some interlude, some pantomimic entertainment, in 
order to render them palatable to the plebeian taste, and to 
keep the spectators in good humour. The principal personage, 
whose mimic powers were called in to enliven the audience, 
was Beelzebub , assisted by a merry troop of subordinate devils , 
44 who with variety of noises, strange postures, gestures, and 
grimaces,” excited the laughter of the populace. When these 
mysteries ceased to be played, the subjects for the drama were 
not taken from historical facts, but consisted of moral reason¬ 
ings in praise of virtue and condemnation of vice, on which 
account they were called 44 Moralities” and these perform¬ 
ances, requiring some degree of imagery and inventive genius, 
conduced ultimately to the composition of dramas more replete 
with incident, connected with history or passing events; 
thus holding up 44 a mirror to the age,” from whence emanated 
the present comedies and tragedies. The dialogues of the 
Moralities were carried on by allegorical characters, such as 
Charity, Faith, Prudence, Good Doctrine, Discretion, &c., 
but the province of amusing the auditory was transferred 
from the Devil of the 44 Mystery ” to Vice or Iniquity of the 
44 Morality,” who generally personified some one of the evil 
passions co-existent with human nature. A slight allusion to 


HISTORY OF LONDON, 


77 


“ Vice” from an ancient play, will illustrate the peculiar 
dress and bearing of the character:—“ Vice came in like 
Hokos-pokos in a juggler’s jerkin, with false skirts like the 
knave of clubs; ” and again, “ Here is never a fiend to carry 
the Vice away, besides he has never a wooden dagger ; Fd not 
give a rush for a Vice that has not a wooden dagger to snap at 
every one he meets” Even when the legitimate drama was 
introduced, we may discern that the feeling of the public still 
favoured the appearance of the facetious descendants of 
“ Vice” and “ Iniquity,” in the clowns and jesters, whose 
ribaldries too often disgraced the stage. Even our immortal 
“ Bard of Avon,” the great master and painter of the human 
passions, was obliged to be subservient to the false taste of 
the age in which he wrote, and to introduce this motley 
personage amidst his highest wrought and most noble cha¬ 
racters. 

All these representations, however, differed materially from 
the secular plays and farces which were acted by strolling 
companies, composed of minstrels, jugglers, tumblers, dancers, 
bourdours, or jesters. These pastimes are of higher antiquity 
than the ecclesiastical plays, and were patronized not only by 
the lower classes, but likewise the nobility, the court of kings 
and the castles of barons being the constant resort of these 
performers, where they were well received and munificently 
rewarded; and the sums lavished on these itinerants induced 
the monks and other ecclesiastics to adopt the profession of 
actors, in order to reap a share of the public bounty, jealous 
that so fertile a source of profit should be monopolized by 
this portion of the laity. The secular showmen , however, 
retained their popularity , notwithstanding the exertions of 
their clerical rivals , who diligently endeavoured to bring them 
into disrepute, by writing and preaching against the immo¬ 
rality of their exhibitions. 


HISTORY OF LONDON, 



Extravagance in living was too prevalent an evil in this 
era, and we are informed by Fitzstephen, that an Archbishop 
of Canterbury paid for a single dish of eels five pounds , a sum 
equivalent to nearly eighty pounds compared with the present 
amount of our currency and provisions. In reference to 
the average value of commodities between the thirteenth 
and nineteenth centuries, 10/. per annum would have 
gone as far in housekeeping as 150/. at present. Wheat 
was 35. per quarter, and French wines, which were 
then freely imported, chiefly from Anjou, Auxerre, and 
Gascony, obtained from 205. to 265. 8 d. per ton; the money, 
however, expended thus in luxuries, did not lead to much 
dissipation of time, or perverting the course of nature by 
carousing throughout the night, and incapacitating the 
reveller from performing the social duties required during the 
day, as has been too much the case in more modern times; 
the hour of dining, even at court and the families of the 
highest aristocracy, was nine in the morning , and of supping 
five in the afternoon , a division of time which was reckoned 
not only conducive to health, but favourable to business. 
The hours thus set apart for family arrangements have been 
preserved in the gingling verse of the day— 

Lever a cinq, diner a neuf, To rise at five and dine at nine, 

Souper a cinq, concher a neuf, To sup at five and bed at nine, 

Fait vivre ans nonante et neuf. Lengthens life at ninety and nine. 

Among the distinguishing characteristics of superiority 
possessed by the citizens, was the honourable appellation 
they enjoyed of Barones; “whilst the inhabitants of other 
cities are styled citizens, they are dignified with the name of 
Barons.” Spelman, in his Glossary, renders Barones syno- 
nimous with cives or homines , citizens or men; and though 
it has been assumed that the Barones were composed 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


79 


of the wealthiest and most illustrious citizens, yet when it 
appears that the inhabitants of the Cinque Ports without dis¬ 
crimination were distinguished as Barones , we may rather 
imply that the term, par excellence , was a designation of Man 
in the full development of those high prerogatives bestowed 
upon him, as the noblest type of the creation. 

“ Let us come now,” as our historian says, “ to the sports 
and pastimes, seeing it is fit that a city should not only be 
commodious and serious, but also merry and sportful.” In the 
holidays during summer, the young men were wont to 
exercise themselves in leaping, dancing, archery, cross-bow 
shooting, wrestling, hurling, running at the Quintain and prac¬ 
tising their shields; the city damsels playing on their citherns , 
or, as rendered by Stow, “ on their timbrels,” and dancing, until 
the evening closed upon their merriment, and which was often 
continued by the light of the moon.* In winter, every holi¬ 
day before dinner, the bears prepared for brawn were 
set to fight, or else bulls or bears baited. When the great 
lake or fen which watered the walls of the city on the north 
side, now Moorjields , was frozen over, the young men amused 
themselves on the ice, “ some striding as wide as they can, do 
slide swiftly, others, more expert, place leg-bones of animals 
beneath their feet, and with a pole shod with iron push them¬ 
selves forward with a velocity equal to the flight of a bird, or 
bolt from a cross-bow.” The citizens also delighted in hawks 
and hounds, having the liberty of hunting in Middlesex, 

* Stow, who wrote between three and four centuries later than the period 
now referred to, states, that it was then customary for the maidens, after 
evening prayers, to dance in the presence of their masters and mistresses, 
while one of their companions played the measure upon a timbrel ; and in 
order to stimulate them to pursue this exercise with alacrity, the best dancers 
were rewarded with garlands, the prizes being exposed to public view, 
“ hanged athwart the street” during the performance. 


80 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Hertfordshire, all Chilton, and in Kent to the waters of 
Grey. 

Though the reign of John was attended with severe amerce¬ 
ments and oppression of the citizens, yet on the aggregate the 
city was ultimately benefited by the temporary privations it 
endured through the extravagance, evil disposition, and mer¬ 
cenary character of the King. At first, John appears to have 
been instigated either by a kindly feeling, proceeding from 
grateful remembrances of the attachment and loyalty of the 
Londoners during his regency, or by a sense of political fear 
which induced him to conciliate their good opinion, knowing 
the importance of their support, being at the time aware of 
the usurpation of which he had been guilty in suppressing the 
rightful claim to the crown of his nephew Arthur. That the 
government of John was generally defective, and his character 
vacillating and tyrannical, no doubt can exist, yet, fortunately 
for the city and the kingdom at large, he persevered, on 
ascending the throne, in the system he had adopted during 
the absence of his brother, King Richard, in the Holy Land, 
of constituting demesne towns, free burghs , which was a main 
incentive to the diffusion of commerce throughout our island; 
and instead of the King’s collectors continuing vested with the 
power of levying tolls and customs from towns, they were 
merged into the payment of one annual sum; termed the fee- 
farm rent of each burgh, the amount being levied by the 
corporate body by local assessment; while the privilege was 
conferred on the towns-people of electing their own chief 
officer, a right hitherto held by the crown. Hence arose the 
present annual magistracy of corporations; on which Speed 
as well as Camden justly remark, that John was either “ the 
first or chiefest who appointed those noble forms of civil 
government in London, and most cities and corporate towns 
of England, endowing them also with their greatest fran- 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


81 


chises.” He granted during the first year of his reign, in 
1199, three charters to the city, one confirming their former 
privileges of “ being quit from toll or lastage, and every other 
custom,” and for which the treasury received 3,000 marks, 
evidencing that the Royal favour was not dispensed out of 
pure grace, but meted in proportion to the known opulence 
of the citizens; another, permitting the jurisdiction of the 
city to be extended over the River Medway, with power 
to inflict a penalty on the erection of weirs in either that 
river or the Thames; the third was indicative of that regard 
towards the citizens before alluded to, as it granted them 
the fee-farm of the Shrievalties of London and Middlesex, 
of which they had been deprived by Matilda, with permission 
to elect their own Sheriffs, and for which the sum of 300/. 
was paid. In a fourth charter, given at the request of 
the Mayor and citizens, the guild of Weavers was “ from 
thenceforth not to be permitted to be held in the City of 
London, nor to be at all maintained; ” the citizens paying to 
the King twenty marks per annum instead of the eighteen 
marks usually received from the Weavers’ Company. This 
extra-judicial proceeding on the part of the corporation 
was most probably prompted by jealousy, as by charter of 
Henry II. the weavers had been allowed to exercise their 
privileges in the city in almost an unlimited manner, and 
without any right of the citizens to intermeddle or control 
them. 

Altercations with the See of Rome, fomented by the 
rebellious spirit of the Church at home, induced the Pope 
to lay the whole kingdom under an interdict, which was 
only removed by the abject submission of the King and 
payment of a large sum of money; towards which the 
Londoners contributed 2,000 marks, and received in lien 
their fifth and last charter from the King, dated the 19th 

VOL. i. m 


82 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


day of May, in the sixteenth year of his reign; beginning, 
44 Know ye, that we have granted to onr Barons of our 
City of London, that they may choose themselves every year 
a Mayor, to be presented to us or our justice, and at the 
end of the year to amove him and substitute another, or 
return the same, confirming all previous liberties, saving 
to us our chamberlainship.” At this time, the King held 
his Parliament at his palace at St. Bride’s, where Bridewell 
Prison, Bridge-street, Blackfriars, now stands. In 1204, 
we find an incident strongly corroborative of the importance 
and extent of the commerce of London, from the circum¬ 
stance that Guy de Von appears to have been indebted to 
the crown the sum of 1,066/. 8s. Ad. for arrears of rent for the 
Cambium , or Exchange of London , which he had leased for 
a term of years. Another fact may be adduced illustrative of 
the profitable character of the office of Chamberlain; the 
appointment, as has been shown, belonging to the King, 
by William de St. Michael having obtained the situation for 
a fine of 100/., and an annual rent of 100 marks. 

At length the imbecility, misrule, and wanton rapacity of 
John alienated the affections and allegiance of the citizens, 
and knowing the perfidy and implacable temperament of their 
Sovereign, they directed their attention to the more effectual 
fortification of their city, before displaying any overt act 
of resistance, and with this view protected their walls by 
digging a deep ditch two hundred feet in width. 

It is often remarked through life, 44 that great events from 
minor causes spring,” though frequently the fact is at the 
moment overlooked, that a combination of circumstances, 
remote at first in their origin, have been for some lengthened 
time gradually converging to a certain point, and require 
only some ultimate exciting occurrence to produce the catas¬ 
trophe, while the final issue is attributed to some recent 


# 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 83 

or comparatively trifling incident. We have been led to 
this observation by one of the later acts of oppression, on 
the part of the King, in persecuting the gallant knight, 
Robert Fitzwalter ., Castellain and Standard-bearer of the City, 
Lord of Baynard’s Castle, an ancient and princely fabric, 
which 44 banked the River Thames” near St. Paul’s Wharf; 
Addle-hill, Thames-street, skirting the western portion of 
the building. The daughter of Fitzwalter was famed for 
her personal charms, which had acquired for her the envied 
celebrity of Matilda the 44 Fair.” This maiden’s beauty had 
captivated the monarch, who proffered his affections, but 
not on honourable terms. His suit being in consequence 
indignantly refused, John intimated his determination to have 
recourse to violence. This tyrannical threat aroused her 
noble father’s resentment, who appealed to his brother Barons 
to protect his virtuous child from the polluting grasp of 
their Sovereign. With chivalrous alacrity they rallied their 
forces round the injured parent, and the city banner floated 
in proud defiance from the castle-walls. John, unable to 
collect a force sufficient to contend against the formidable 
opposition Fitzwalter offered, affected to have relinquished 
all designs against the honour of his family, and by well- 
feigned assurances of respect for the rights of the Barons, 
prevailed upon them to disperse their forces. As soon as he 
found himself master of the field, he violated his plighted 
faith and promises, seized Fitz waiter’s castle by surprize, 
which he destroyed, and forced him to fly the country. 
Matilda, who was prevented accompanying her father, fell 
into the power of the King, and heroically resisted all his 
seductive entreaties, until John, with remorseless vengeance, 
is recorded to have caused the destruction of that beauty 
by poison which he had failed when living to possess. This 
incident may be reckoned one of the collaterally stimulating 


HISTORY OT LONDON. 


N4 

causes which afterwards conduced to the general resistance of 
the Barons, and compelled the King at JRunnymede to accede, 
unconditionally , to their demands for a Charter , which would 
not only reinstate the nobles and people in their former rights, 
but bestow upon them important additional immunities, as set 
forth in that glorious and ever-memorable declaration of the 
rights of Englishmen, Magna Charta and Charta de 
Foresta ; in the former of which it is stipulated u that 
the City of London should have all its ancient privileges 
and free customs.” 

London was now c< a noble city,” according to William of 
Malmesbury, “ renowned for the opulence of her citizens, 
and crowded with the merchants who resort thither with 
their commodities,” the trade in corn, as in the time of 
the Romans, forming one of the principal articles of com¬ 
merce, which was entirely monopolized by the London 
merchants, “ who had their granaries always filled, whence 
all parts of the kingdom were supplied.” 

John is said to have been the first monarch who coined the 
money called sterling or Easterling* penny, which obtained 
this name from the circumstance of his sending for artists 
from the German states to rectify and regulate the silver 
coinage, gold coin not being then appropriated as a circu¬ 
lating medium of exchange. The penny was of silver, 
and the twentieth part of an ounce, and was enacted as well 
during the reign of John’s successor, Henry III., to be 
round without any clipping, and “ to weigh thirty-two wheat- 
corns taken out of the midst of the ear.” The King’s Ex¬ 
change for the receipt of “ bullion to be coined” was situated 

* The Germans derived the name of Easterlings from there having been 
a commercial confederacy, first formed on the Eastern shores of the Baltic, 
in the eighth century; and Pennant styles the Easterlings , “ our masters 
in the art of commerce.” 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


85 


near the middle of the street now called Old Change , by St. 
Paul’s. 

The long reign of Henry III. exhibits a disgraceful 
catalogue of heavy pecuniary penalties extorted from the 
inhabitants of London under the most frivolous and un¬ 
justifiable pretexts, levies which were made to meet the 
emergencies of the lavish and extravagant expenditure of 
the Crown. So onerous eventually became the nature of 
these exactions, so impressed were the citizens with the 
conviction that honour and justice, conscience and religion, 
were alike sacrificed at the shrine of expediency, and that 
their dear-bought liberties and charters were merely nominal, 
finding them no restriction against any innovation instigated 
by the momentary caprices of royalty, that many of the 
principal merchants absented themselves from business and 
retired into the country, resolved no longer to submit to 
such spoliatory and ruinous government. This determination 
alarmed the King, as the resources he obtained from the 
city w r ere his only salvation in the hour of need; he sum¬ 
moned, therefore, the chief officers of London, and promised, 
in the presence of the nobility, not again to oppress the 
citizens; promises which were as readily broken as he had 
been free to make them; and about six years afterwards, in 
1256, the nation being visited by a dreadful famine, in con¬ 
sequence of a wet harvest, wheat, according to the Chronicon 
Preciosum , having risen to 24s. per quarter, the City of 
London was so drained of money by the continual demands 
of the King, in addition to those of the Pope, that many 
of the eminent citizens found great difficulty in procuring 
provisions for their families, and the poorer classes were 
constrained to devour dogs and carrion, and even the wash 
given to swine. The spirit and energy of the Londoners, 
however, remained unsubdued, and though, through the 


86 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


prodigality of the Court, the riches of the country were 
materially exhausted, yet the little wealth still remaining in 
the kingdom was deposited in the coffers of the metropolitan 
merchants. The King, therefore, when his necessities became 
so urgent that he was compelled to pawn the Crown jewels, 
was forced to have recourse to the citizens for the loan. 
Enraged that they should still possess the means of raising 
the sum required, and that they should accept a pledge 
which it was ignominious in him to offer, he passionately 
exclaimed, “ Were the treasures of Augustus Caesar exposed 
to sale, the City would buy them. These fellows, who call 
themselves Barons, are wallowing in wealth and every species 
of luxury, whilst we labour under the want of common 
necessaries.” But in honest candour it must be acknow¬ 
ledged, that when the citizens had to negotiate with princes, 
who were not embarrassed through their personal prodigality 
and folly , but impoverished by enterprises undertaken for 
the national fame or aggrandisement, they required not se¬ 
curities and pledges to administer most liberally to the State 
exigencies. These assertions may be illustrated by the gift 
of the citizens of 20,000 marks to the hero of Cressy to 
prosecute his valiant warfare in France, and the celebrated 
Whittington, who at an entertainment given at Guildhall to 
Henry V. as conqueror at Agincourt, cast into a fire of 
spices bonds which he held from that monarch for loans 
of money to the amount of 60,000/. Yet we are prone 
to confess, that though liberality at times conspicuously 
distinguished the civic character, yet generally it may be 
perceived that there was much reserve on the part of the 
citizens in all their pecuniary transactions with the Court; 
and even until the reign of Elizabeth, the British Sovereigns 
were wont to have recourse to foreign merchants, chiefly 
those in Flanders, in order to raise the sums of money 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


87 


required by way of loan; and though the London merchants 
often became security, as the money in few instances would 
have been otherwise granted, yet they were never induced, 
except in the case of the Crown jewels previously men¬ 
tioned, to advance the cash themselves, a line of conduct 
suggested by common worldly policy and mercantile fore¬ 
thought, especially after the experience, so dearly obtained, 
that grants and charters were no safeguard to property 
against the arbitrary will of the Sovereign; and that the 
King might deny to his own subjects the justice which he 
would be fearful of refusing to those of a foreign State. 
The first important loan effected in England, wholly on 
the personal security of the Sovereign, was negotiated by Sir 
Thomas Gresham for Queen Elizabeth, a fact which may 
be assumed as a certain index that the administration of 
public affairs approximated nearer a system of order and 
equity than England had known since the reign of our 
British Lycuryus , Alfred. The maiden Queen paid regularly 
the interest of the loan, and eventually the principal, exem¬ 
plifying the precept, which in earlier ages as at present would 
have held its maxim, that it is only required to keep in view 
the straightforward and simple rules dictated by honesty in 
order to insure, throughout the kingdom, assistance to meet 
the pressing emergencies of the public service. 

An ostentatious show of opulence, and an overweening 
rivalry in the sumptuousness and costliness of their living, 
seem from the earliest data to have characterized the London 
merchants; a display, not confined, which would perhaps have 
been more creditable, to the reception either of their Sove¬ 
reigns, foreign potentates, or ambassadors, and other illus¬ 
trious foreigners, but exhibited at their own corporation feasts. 
In 1363, Henry Picard , who had previously served the office 
of Mayor, gave a splendid entertainment at his house in 


88 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Cheapside to King Edward III., King John of FranceKing 
David of Scotland, and the King of Cyprus. After these 
illustrious guests had departed, the worthy host kept his 
hall open for all comers that were willing to play at dice and 
hazard, and in like manner the lady Margaret, his wife, 
kept her chamber to the same intent, showing that the 
vicious habits of gambling were participated in by both 
sexes even in these early days. Eels , most lusciously 
dressed, before turtle was introduced, appear to have 
been the acme of Corporation gout , and considered the 
“ one thing needful ” to complete the gourmanic list of 
civic epicurism. At length, the extravagance of feasting 
became so intolerable, that the citizens, in 1554, were 
induced to pass a by-law to restrain this prevailing passion ; 
“ so huge and great,” says this curious document, “ had 
become the charges of the mayoralty and shrievalty, that 
almost all good citizens flee and refuse to serve in this 
honourable city, only because of the great excess and 
chargeable fare and diet used in the time of the said offices; ” 
to remedy which it was ordered, that no mayor, sheriff, 
alderman, or commoner, should have at dinner or supper 
more courses than one, and not more dishes at one course 
than six, whether hot or cold; but as a special mark of 
delicate sympathy for the privation thus imposed, it is de¬ 
clared, that one or two of the same six dishes may come to 
the board hot, if they will, after the first three or five are 
served; and by way of bonus, that neither brawn, nor collops 
with eggs, nor sallads, pottage, butter, cheese, eggs, herrings, 
sprats, shrimps, nor any shell-fish, nor any kind of unbaked 
fruit, are to be accounted for as any of the said list of 
diminished fare ! The only exception made to these “ short 
commons ” was “ at their necessary meetings,” when full 
indulgence to the appetite was permitted. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


8i) 


Notwithstanding the various oppressive measures adopted 
by Henry III. towards the citizens, he was unable to check 
the improvement of the city, which emanated from sources 
more pure and permanent than those of courtly favour. In 
1218, the forest of Middlesex was disforested, and the 
citizens availed themselves of the opportunity of purchasing 
lands and erecting houses, which was the means of con¬ 
siderably enlarging the suburbs. Commerce, however, 
though it continued to advance its numerous connexions, 
progressed slowly, owing to the constant irritation and dis¬ 
traction of the merchants from business through the factious 
conduct of the Court. * It appears that Queenhithe was the 
principal port of the city, and Belin 1 s-gate only of secondary 
importance; for we find that Henry III., in 1225, com¬ 
manded the constables of the Tower to arrest the ships of 
the Cinque Ports, and compel them to bring their corn to no 
other place than Queens Hithe , and afterwards ordered all 
fish to be distrained if offered for sale in any other place; 
all commodities paying certain tolls, chiefly in kind. The 
impediment, however, which London Bridge presented to the 
unrestricted progress of vessels coming from sea, ultimately 
forced the trade to Belin’s-gate, or Billingsgate, though 
Queenhithe, as late as the reign of Edward IV., struggled to 
maintain its ancient pre-eminence. In 1246, the city pur¬ 
chased from Richard, Earl of Cromwell, brother to Henry, 
the fee-farm of Queenhithe, with all its rights, customs, and 
privileges, and in 1268, we have an interesting historical 
account, the earliest cited, of the customs and tolls received 
at the port of London, which manifests the superiority of 
Queen’s Hithe. 

Among the items are the following: 


VOL. 1. 


N 


90 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Amount of customs on foreign merchandize for 
six months ...... 

Metage of corn and customs at Belin’s-gate 

Customs of fish brought to London Bridge- 
street ....... 

Amount of the produce of Queen’s Hi the . 

Stallage dues from the markets of West-Cheap , 
Grass-Chirche, and Wool-Chirche-haioe, with 
the annual scota^e of the butchers of 
London ....... 

Amount of tonnages at the King’s Weigh House 
and petty standages ..... 

Other sundry dues ...... 


£. s. d. 
75 6 10 
5 18 7 

7 0 2 

17 9 2 


42 0 0 

97 13 11 

119 4 6 


£364 13 2 


Making an annual average of 729/. 6s. 4d. paid to the Crown from 
the port of London for customs, tolls, See. Two years previous 
to this revenue account, in the year 1266, Henry granted to 
the Hanseatic merchants the extensive immunities which they 
enjoyed for three hundred years, and enabled them to realize 
considerable fortunes. Werdenhangen , the historian of the 
Hans Towns,* states that the Hanseatic ships, on their 

* The whole confederacy constituting the German or Hanseatic League 
was very extensive. The Easterlings were the most celebrated branch, and 
settled in London. The societies abroad were divided into four classes, each 
having a presiding city, and the grand separations were into east and west. 
The first had Cologne for its capital; the other branches were formed by the 
union of Lubeck, Wismar, Rostock, Stralsund, Greifswahl, Anclam, Stettin, 
Colberg, Stolpe, Danzig, Elbing, and Kdnigsberg. The term Hanse, or 
Hansa, is synonymous with Gild, and was so usually understood in the 
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. King John, in his charter to Dunwich, 
says, “ We grant them a Hanse," and Henry III. uses the expression, 




HISTORY OF LONDON. 


91 

return from assisting Henry in a successful enterprize against 
France, were almost all lost in a tempest, whereupon the 
Hanseatics demanded their value; but they agreed to remit 
the debt on condition of the King granting, for himself and 
successors, free liberty to the Easterlings to import and export 
all merchandize whatever, at no higher duty or custom than 
one per cent., which was the rate then paid. The merchants 
also of Lubeck obtained a grant of commercial privileges on 
the same terms; and we learn from Gerard Malynes, that a 
society of Englishmen had existed previous to this period, 
under the name of the 44 Merchants of Staple,” as they 
exported the staple-wares of the kingdom, comprising the 
rough materials for manufacture, as wool , skins , lead , and tin; 
the fabric of woollen cloths and importation of Spanish wool 
being of more ancient date. From these sources of export 
alone, England long supplied all its foreign wants, and 
brought home annually a considerable balance of bullion. 

So strong ran the tide of party feeling at this era, and to 
so great an extent had the influence of the gilds arrived, that 
in 1226 a dispute having arisen between the Goldsmiths 
and Tailors , each Company, with their friends, met on an 
appointed night, to the number of five hundred, completely 
armed, and proceeded to decide the difference by force of arms. 
Many were killed and wounded, nor could the combatants be 
parted till the Sheriff* and civil authorities came and appre¬ 
hended the ringleaders, thirteen of whom were condemned 
and executed. The various tumults and revolts, which either 
the direct injustice and tyranny of Henry excited, or the 
refractory spirit to which they gave birth, rendered, at times, 
the streets at night unsafe for the peaceable inhabitants; and 

“ Quod habeant Hansam suam.” The citizens of Cologne paid Henry III. 
thirty marks to have seizin of their Guildhall in London, termed “ Gilhalda 
Teutonicorum.” 


HISTORY or LONDON. 


92 

their houses were not unfrequently plundered by parties 
assuming the garb of the patroles employed for the public 
safety, which instigated the citizens to establish an organized 
body of men called the 44 city watch,” whose first appointment 
took place about the year 1262. 

In 1272, wine gaugers were appointed in London and other 
principal seaports, and in the metropolis the new gauge duty 
amounted to 15/. 16s. Id., which at Id. per dolium , or ton, 
makes the quantity imported amount to 3,799 tons; indeed 
the chief article of import at this date seems to have been 
wine, principally from France and the Rhine, as scarcely any 
mention is made of entries from Spain, Portugal, or Italy. 

The increased population and encroachment of buildings on 
the springs and rivulets near the city, created a great want 
of pure and wholesome water. Previous to this period, the 
western parts of the city and adjacent villages had been 
supplied from the River of Wells , or Fleet River, which was 
formed by the influx of several springs, whose course became 
impeded by the erection of different mills by the Knights of 
St. John, the stream afterwards assuming the name of Turn- 
mill Brook , passing where Turnmill-street, Holborn, now 
stands; Olbourne was a rivulet rising near Middle-row, and 
flowed into the Fleet at Holborn Bridge; the eastern parts of 
the city were watered by the Wallbrook rivulet, which united 
with the Thames near Dowgate, but being choked up by the 
numerous bridges and erections on it, dwindled into a common 
sewer; Langbourne rivulet, which took its rise near the east 
end of Fenchurch-street, ran with a swift current due w r est, 
and then turning south, divided into several rills or shares , 
and was called Southbourne- lane, or Sharebourne- lane, share 
being the old English for divided stream , and was afterwards 
united with Wallbrook. Besides these, there was Holywell, 
rendered sacred for the miraculous virtue of its water, nqw 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


93 


filled up with soil, and called Holywell-lane, Shoreditch; 
Clerkenwell, Skinner’s Well, and, more eastward towards the 
Charter-house, Fogg’s Well, Tod’s Well, Loder’s Well, and 
Shadwell, which, with another in Smithfield called the Horse- 
pool , all united their streams in forming the river of Wells 
before mentioned. Without Cripplegate was a large pool, sup¬ 
plied from Crowder’s Well, adjoining the north-west side of St. 
Giles’s Churchyard, and at times contained so great depth of 
water, that people have been drowned who accidentally fell in. 
In order, therefore, to furnish the inhabitants with a more 
plentiful supply of water, the corporation of the city obtained 
a grant from Gilbert de Sandfiord , lord of the manor of Tye- 
bourne, then a village “ at a considerable distance,” of certain 
springs in the vicinity of St. Mary-bourne, from whence water 
was to be conducted into the city in leaden pipes, of six inches 
in diameter, and was the first attempt of thus conveying water 
for the use of the inhabitants. The water was distributed 
into various large reservoirs or cisterns, composed of lead 
cased with stone, the most capacious of which was erected in 
an open field, called Crown-field, in West Cheap, so denomi¬ 
nated from the “ Crown Inn,” at that time situated at the 
east end of this open space, and which is now occupied with 
the populous and opulent street, Cheapside. At the time we 
are now describing, the middle of the thirteenth century, the 
principal dwellings in the city ran nearer the Thames, and 
more to the eastward, the houses being still, for the most 
part, thatched, and which, in 1246, required a renewal of the 
ordinance, that all buildings should he covered with tiles and 
slates, instead of straw, more especially those which stood 
contiguous to the few principal streets. Even the intro¬ 
duction of the comfort of having a free egress for the smoke 
by chimneys, was of only partial adoption until the middle of 
the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the citizens being 


94 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


wont to have their wood-fires lighted on the hearth in the 
middle of the room, the smoke making its escape by the door 
or window, whichever chance might permit; indeed, before 
the days of Richard I., chimneys were hardly known in 
London, and then only existed in the halls of the principal 
nobility, and in religious houses. While this method of 
preventing the inmates from being choked or smoke-dried was 
considered a vast advancement in the art of civilization and 
indication of increasing luxury , it was left to nearly the close 
of the year 1700 before all the disagreeable effects of smoky 
rooms were dispelled by the Rumford stove; and we are now 
advancing towards the middle of the nineteenth century, 
anticipating the luxury and comfort of entirely dispensing 
with chimneys and their draughts, by either having our 
houses heated by gas, warm air, water, steam, or of super¬ 
seding their utility by stoves which consume their own smoke , 
or by means of a still more modern invention, of intro¬ 
ducing a simple iron vase of classic form into our apartments 
which generates its heat without coal, feeds on its own 
combustion, ignites nothing extraneous, and is transportable 
at pleasure from the carriage to the drawing-room. 

Reverting from this momentary digression to our original 
subject of supplying water to the metropolis, it was found 
that these conduits involving considerable labour and ex¬ 
pense, the foreign merchants were called upon to contribute 
towards the charge, and were accordingly assessed in the sum 
of 100/.; but in consideration of which, and in addition to the 
payment of forty marks annually, they acquired in return the 
privilege of landing , housing, and selling wood , and other 
bulky commodities , which before they had been compelled to 
vend ex ship. It was also customary for the Lord Mayor, 
Aldermen, and principal citizens, to repair on horseback on 
the 18th of every September, to examine the springs from 


HISTORY OF LONDON-, 


95 


whence the conduits were supplied, and “ to hunt a hare in 
the morning, and a fox after dinner, in the fields adjacent to 
the town of Tyebourne.” Ultimately, the numerous conduits 
which received water from Hackney, Hampstead, Hoxton, 
Red Lion Fields, &c., became disused, owing to the success¬ 
ful efforts of Peter Morice, in the reign of Elizabeth, in rais¬ 
ing water from the Thames, as before alluded to; in addition 
to the Herculean attempt of Sir Hugh Middleton, in 1608 , of 
bringing water by artificial ducts from a- spring at Am well, 
between Hertford and Ware, assisted by a branch of the 
River Lea, to the north side of London, near Islington, where 
reservoirs were constructed to receive the “ maiden stream.” 
The channel of this “ New River ” was narrow, and from the 
inequality of the ground varied considerably in depth, which 
in parts was upwards of thirty feet; it formed a winding course 
of about forty miles, and was crossed by eighty bridges, the 
whole undertaking being completed in five years. As the 
magnitude of the metropolis has so prodigiously enlarged, the 
facilities for furnishing the inhabitants called forth fresh ener¬ 
gies, and there are now eight Water Companies established, as 
detailed in the annexed table. Well-founded complaints are, 
however, made as to the quality of the water, which is no 
doubt capable of considerable improvement, more particularly 
the supplies derived from the River Thames, which, being the 
grand reservoir of all the common sewers and filth of London 
and Westminster, cannot be the purest source for obtaining a 
wholesome cleanly beverage, which forms so essential a 
portion of one of the chief necessaries of life, and which 
ought to be regulated and guarded by such restrictions as 
would ensure these requisites; and though Committees of the 
House of Commons have, within these few sessions, reported 
to this effect, no steps have been taken to ensure the exe¬ 
cution of the Parliamentary recommendations. 


96 


IITSTORY OF LONDON. 


SUPPLIES OF WATER TO THE METROPOLIS. 


Names of 
Companies. 

Number of 
houses and 
buildings 
supplied. 

Average 
rates per 
house or 
building. 

Total quantity sup¬ 
plied yearly. 

Average 

daily 

supply 

per 

house or 
building. 

Highest 

eleva¬ 
tion to 
which 
water is 
raised. 

New River 

73,212 

s. d. 
26 6 

Hhds. 

114,650,000 

Galls. 

241 

Feet. 

145 

Chelsea . . . 

13,891 

33 

3 

15,753,000 

168 

135 

Grand Junction . 

.11,140 

48 

6 

21,702,567 

350 

151* 

West Middlesex . 

16,000 

56 10 

20,000,000 

185 

188 

East London . . 

46,421 

22 

6 

37,810,594 

120* 

107 

South London 

12,046 

15 

0 

6,979,031 

100 

80 

Lambeth . . . 

16,682 

17 

0 

11,998,600 

124 

185 

Southwark . . 

7,100 

21 

3 

7,000,000 

156 

60 


196,492 

30 11 

235,893,792 

180* 

•— 


There are numerous wells which lend their assistance in 
supplying a more pure beverage, and the water derived from 
this source is healthy and palatable. Several wells in 
London are between 200 and 300 feet deep, and on rising 
grounds the thickness of the stratum is much greater. At 
Primrose Hill the ground was bored to the depth of 500 feet 
without success, and at Lord Spencer’s, at Wimbledon, a well 
was sunk 530 feet. One mile east of the City, the “ London 
clay” is estimated only 77 feet thick; while at a well in St. 
James’s-street it is 235 feet, and at High Beach 700 feet. 

Before closing the memorabilia of Henry’s reign, we must 
not omit allusion to the origin of a trifling circumstance, the 
remembrance of which has been transmitted to our own times 
at the annual ceremony of swearing in the Sheriffs before the 
Cursitor Barons of the Exchequer, when six horse-shoes, 
with their nails, are tendered as a quit-rent, the custom 
having arisen from the possession of a piece of ground in 
the Strand, within the parish of St. Clement Danes, by 























HISTORY OF LONDON. 


97 


Walter Le Bruin , a farrier, who, in 1235, purchased the 
same of the Crown for the construction of a forge, on 
condition of making payment of the said shoes and nails. 
Though the forge no longer exists, yet the acknowledgment 
continues to be made, the ground being claimed by the city 
by a subsequent conveyance. 

The reign of Edward I. dawned more auspiciously on the 
interests of the citizens, and being favoured with the con¬ 
sideration of their Sovereign, they experienced the gratifying 
contrast of his more equitable government, compared with the 
oppression they had submitted to under the lengthened 
dominion of his father. On Edward’s immediate return to 
England as King, his conciliatory interposition was called 
into requisition by the internal dissension of the citizens on 
the election of their Mayor; and so uncompromising was each 
party, that it was found necessary to appoint a custos of the 
city; until the excitement of the moment subsiding, the citizens 
on cool reflection became convinced of the danger to which 
intestine broils would have subjected their liberties under the 
rule of a sovereign less inclined to moderation than Edward; 
they therefore chose their Mayor at full Folkmote ,* and 
arranged their differences. As a special mark of royal favour, 
the King, in the third year of his reign, employed the Mayor, 
Gregory de Rokeslie , to execute a foreign mission of some 
considerable importance, in preference to many dignitaries in 
Church and State, who solicited the appointment. The 
King’s attention was next occupied in ordering the Mayor and 
Sheriffs to enforce the laws in protecting the public against 
the frauds and impositions of the venders of provisions, and 

# A Folkmote was an assemblage of the whole of the commonalty in St. 
Paul’s Churchyard, to which they were summoned by a great bell in a tower 
at the east end of the church, and this meeting was deemed the supreme 
meeting of the city. 


VOL. I. 


O 


m 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the iniquitous practices of engrossing and forestalling, a system 
ever prejudicial to the fair trader. The bakers and millers 
seem more particularly to have shared the public odium, two 
branches of business which we ever find, in ancient and modern 
history, singled out as objects of popular resentment. Millers 
were restricted to the rate of one halfpenny for grinding each 
quarter of corn; and if convicted of extortion or giving short 
measure, to be punished by being drawn through certain 
streets in a dung cart, exposed to the derision of the pas¬ 
sengers ; the baker, for selling short weight, was, on the third 
offence, to be put in the pillory, the first and second being 
punished by forfeiture of his bread and imprisonment. Poul¬ 
terers and fishmongers were also placed under the civic control, 
prices being affixed to their different commodities, by which 
we find that, in 1277, a best hen was valued at 3\d. ; a goose, 
3d. to 5 d .; partridge, 3\d. ; pheasant, 4(7.; two woodcocks, 
1^(7.; swan, 35.; peacock, Id. ; best rabbit, with skin, 4 d., 
and 3d. without skin ; hare, 3|(7.; lamb, 4 d. to 6(7.; best fresh 
salmon, 3s. to 5s.; turbot, 8(7.; lampreys, per 100, 6(7. to 8 d.; 
eels, per 25, 2d. ; smelts, per 100, 1 d., &c. It was also 
ordered, that no market should be held on London Bridge or 
elsewhere, 44 except as should be appointed by the city 
authorities; and that no person was to go into Southwark 
to buy cattle, or any wares to be brought into the city, 
on penalty of forfeiture of the thing purchased.” Towards 
the close of Edward’s reign, and commencement of the four¬ 
teenth century, provisions were again regulated in price; 
poultry and game had sustained little variation; lambs, how¬ 
ever, from Christmas to Shrovetide, had risen in value to 
Is. 4 d .; a quarter of wheat was worth 4s.; ditto of ground 
malt, 3s. 4 d. ; ditto of peas, 2s. 6d. ; ditto of oats, 2s.; a bull, 
7s. 6<7.; a cow, 6s.; a fat mutton , Is.; a ewe sheep, 8(7.; and 
while recording the cost price of the necessaries of life, we 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


99 


may allude to the scale of salaries of some of the chief 
officers of State, as demonstrative of the low range of emolu¬ 
ments of that period compared with the present. The Chief 
Justice of the King’s Bench received 50 marks, and of the 
Common Pleas, 100 marks; Chief Baron, 100/.; and each of 
the other judges of the three benches 20/.; the Chancellor of 
the Exchequer, 40/. Exactions of fees and gratuities no doubt 
formed a considerable additional item of the incomes, but the 
absolute amount of expenditure required to support the 
dignity of their office was but small, if we take a general 
estimate of the necessaries of ordinary living; for it appears 
that, in 1307, when the Archbishop of St. Andrew’s, Scotland, 
was a prisoner at Winchester, that he was allowed Is. per day, 
for the maintenance of himself and servants, divided in the 
following proportions:—for the Archbishop’s own daily ex¬ 
pense, 6d .; one man-servant to attend him, 3 cl .; one boy 
ditto, \^d .; a chaplain to say daily mass to him, 1 \d.: and 
the Queen of Robert Bruce who was a prisoner in England, 
in 1314, was allowed only 20s. per week for herself and 
household. 

From the year 1283, London, as well as other principal 
cities and towns in England, have to date the origin of that 
noble system of legislative representation which was mainly 
instrumental in inflicting a mortal blow at the feudal tenures, 
liberating the people from local oppression and thraldom, and 
imparting freedom and security to commerce; and though 
through successive reigns only slow and partial improvements 
and advancements were made towards the liberty of the 
franchise of the subject, in the selection of members most 
eligible to represent the particular interests of the divisional 
portions of the kingdom; yet reform did succeed reform , until 
the glorious measure of “ Parliamentary Reform” was par¬ 
tially consummated by the Bill of 1832, and which, according 


100 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


to the growing popular feeling, only awaits the climax of the 
44 vote by ballot,” shortening the 44 duration of Parliaments,” 
and 44 extending the right of suffrage,” to make the present 
law attain a temporary degree of perfection . It is proved by 
Rymer, in his 44 Foedera,” that, in 1283, Edward summoned 
to his Parliament at Shrewsbury two knights for each county, 
and two representatives for the twenty-one principal cities 
and towns in England, including London, being the first 
instance in which writs were issued by the Crown to cities 
and towns; but no regularity appears to have been preserved 
in the sending these writs for 300 years after this time; many 
places being occasionally omitted at some elections and sent 
to at subsequent ones, while others were added without the 
direction of the King or his Council, but, according to Dr. 
Brady, at the discretion of the Sheriffs. 

During the remainder of the sovereignty of Edward, and 
succeeding reign of Edward II., a striking instance is afforded 
that in proportion as feudalism declined, commerce was 
extended, by the number of charters of privileges granted 
to foreign merchants; besides that, the increased use of gold 
and silver among the citizens was strongly indicative of their 
growing opulence and splendour of living; and which, as 
early as the twenty-eighth year of the reign of Edward I., 
instigated the passing of an Act of Parliament, ordering 
ail vessels of gold and silver to be assayed by the Company 
of Goldsmiths of London. 

In 1304 we meet with the first recurrence to the office of 
Recorder of London, when Geoffrey de Hartilepole was in¬ 
vested with the appointment, and allowed to wear his gown 
as an alderman. The succeeding year is stigmatized in 
the annals of the country by the perpetration of one of 
those State crimes which nations sanction under the dis¬ 
graceful palliative of political expediency. Happy w r ould it 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


101 


have been for England’s fame “ if the recording angel could 
have dropped a tear upon the deed, and blotted it out for 
ever;” but that stain of blood made too indelible an im¬ 
pression ever to be effaced. It was in 1305 that the hero 
and patriot, Sir William Wallace, was taken prisoner in 
nobly defending his country’s rights, and, contrary to the 
law of nations, hanged and quartered in Smithfield, and his 
head affixed on a pole on London Bridge. 

In 1306, an ordinance was issued for the prohibition of 
bTiming coal, which was occasioned by a complaint made by 
the nobility and gentry to the King, alleging that the air was 
infected with a noisome smell, and a thick cloud from the 
coals used in the suburbs by brewers, dyers, and other 
manufacturers requiring large fires, to the great endan¬ 
gering the health of the inhabitants. Upon which repre¬ 
sentation his Majesty issued his proclamation, forbidding 
coals to be burnt in London and suburbs under severe 
penalties, and in the early days of the celebrated Whittington , 
the use of coal was still considered so great a public nuisance, 
that the burning of it was made a capital offence, and in Sir 
Everard Home’s “ Dissertations,” it is cited from a record in 
the Tower, that a person was once actually executed for 
infringing the law. It is, however, remarkable that, in 1419, 
when Whittington had been 66 thrice Lord Mayor of London 
towm,” though during the intermediate period, no repeal 
of this rigorous statute appears to have occurred, yet the 
import of coal formed a considerable branch of the commerce 
of the Thames. As early as 1421, it was a trade of great 
importance, and a duty of ‘Id. per chaldron had been imposed 
upon it for some time. The only reasonable mode of ac¬ 
counting for the trade making so extensive progress, when 
such severe penal enactments were unrepealed, is by assuming 
that the Crown so far abrogated the statute by exercising a dis- 


10*2 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


pensing power, by no means unusual with the court practices 
of those days, of granting to some favoured individual a 
license to make his fortune by violating the laws; and many 
circumstances combine in inducing the supposition, that Sir 
Richard Whittington was the party on whom this privilege 
had been conferred; a presumption which, if correct, will 
readily elucidate part of the traditionary history of Whit¬ 
tington having made his fortune “ by a king; ” as he was 
in business at the commencement of the trade, through it 
realized his property, and from the first opening of the cojtl 
trade in England, and for centuries afterwards, it had the 
reputation of making fortunes, only exceeded by the mines of 
Golconda and Peru. As to the “ cat,” we must have recourse 
to the ingenious suggestion of Foote , who, in his comedy of 
the “ Nabob,” makes “ Sir Mattlieiv Mite ” offer to the 
Society of Antiquarians a solution of the popular legend. 
“ The commerce,” says Sir Matthew, “ which this worthy 
merchant carried on was chiefly confined to our coasts; for 
this purpose he constructed a vessel which, from its agility 
and lightness, he aptly christened a 6 cat.’ Nay, to this day, 
gentlemen, all our coals from Newcastle are imported in 
nothing but cats; from hence it appears, that it was not the 
whiskered, four-footed, mouse-killing cat , but the coasting, 
sailing, coal-carrying Cat ,—that, gentlemen, was Whittington’s 
Cat” If to these chances Sir Richard owed his prosperity, it 
had only to become a by-word, that by a “ cat and a king ” 
he had make his fortune, and popular invention would soon 
supply all the other features of the legend. 

We have reserved until now more particular allusion to 
an event, which occurred during the first Edward’s reign, the 
division of the city into twenty-four wards, of which we have 
the first historical record in 1285. Some few of the wards 
at this time were hereditary, but the others elected an 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


103 


Alderman , who presided at the judicial council of the city. 
The deliberations, however, of the Aldermen, in all public 
concerns, were mainly influenced by the advice of the more 
immediate delegates of the citizens, the Council-men , a body 
of members who consisted of forty-four, selected, at first, from 
certain Gilds , Mysteries , or Crafts; thus the Mayor, Aider- 
men, and Councilmen, acted for the city in the capacity of 
the King, Lords, and Commons. The number of common- 
councilmen proved too limited to represent the numerous 
and divided interests of the citizens, and neglecting the trust 
confided in them, acted more as a “ packed jury,” seeking to 
secure to themselves individual advancement, rather than acting 
as the guardians of the citizens, for whose special protection 
they were appointed. Petitions were therefore presented to the 
Mayor, in 1384, in the seventh year of Richard II., praying 
the number to be augmented, as “ divers things were passed 
more by clamour than reason.” It was in consequence deter¬ 
mined by the authorities, that each Alderman should cause 
to be chosen by the citizens four Common-Councilmen for 
each ward; this privilege, in the ninth year of the same 
reign, was further increased, the wards, according to their 
extent, choosing from four to eight members, and which 
varied in progress of time, as the limits of the city were 
enlarged from six to tv:elve; at present the numbers range 
from four to seventeen , comprising a total of 240 Common- 
Councilmen, including the different deputies of each ward, 
forty Common-Councilmen forming a Court. It was not, 
however, till the reign of Edward II., that we discover, as 
observed by Mr. Norton,* the first authentic mention of the 
mercantile nature of the civic constitution of London, and of 
the mercantile qualification requisite in the candidates for 
admission to the freedom of the city. By one of a number of 

* Commentaries on bondon. 


104 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


articles of regulation, ordained by the citizens for their 
internal government, which articles were confirmed by Edward 
II., and incorporated into a charter, it was provided that no 
person, whether an inhabitant of the city or otherwise, should 
be admitted into the civic freedom unless he was a member of 
one of the Gilds , or unless with the full consent of the whole 
community convened; only that apprentices might still be 
admitted according to the established regulations. Before this 
period, no mention occurs of any mercantile qualification to 
entitle the householder to his admission to the corporation. 

The Saxon appellation of Ealderman , Alderman , or Elder- 
man ,, is synonymous with the Latin designation of Senex, 
whence is derived Senators. The epithet, among our early 
progenitors, was one of high distinction, and corresponding 
with that of Earl. Madox states, that u Alderman was a 
name for a chief governor of a secular gild, and in time it 
became also a name for a chief officer in a gildated town or 
borough,” and quotes, in illustration, the circumstance of 
the prior of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, becoming an Alderman of 
London, in consequence of the grant to that priory of the 
“ English Knighten Gild,” and to which Stow assigns the 
origin of Portsoken Ward.* In the seventeenth of Richard II., 
1394, it was enacted by Parliament, that the Aldermen of 

* There is no trace when the name of Alderman was first applied to the 
president of the London wards or gilds; the probability is, it was intro¬ 
duced after the Conquest. The denomination was common in the Saxon 
times to various judicial dignities and offices, but there is no record of it as 
applied to the heads of particular districts in London during that period; 
and there is reason to believe that the appellation was not used in that 
sense until the reign of Henry II., when they are first mentioned as pre¬ 
siding over gilds, some of which were territorial, and others mercantile . 
In the reign of Henry III., Aldermanries had become a common term for 
a civic district comprised within a leet jurisdiction, as well in London as in 
other cities. 


HISTORY OF LONDON, 


105 


of the city should not, from thenceforth be elected annually* 
but continue in their several offices during life or good 

o o 

behaviour; and amongst the qualifications enumerated in 
earlier days to render the candidate eligible to the dignity, 
he was to be of comely person , ivise, grave , wealthy , faithful\ 
and generous; not of mean and servile condition , so as to 
disparage the place and state of the city. 

The term Ward is also of Saxon derivation, denoting a dis¬ 
trict , which has given rise to the opinion, that certain portions 
or quarters of London, like other cities and towns, were origin¬ 
ally held of the Saxon monarchs and noblemen in demesne , to 
whom they appertained as so many sokes or liberties; and 
corroborative of this supposition, we read in “ Liber Albusf 
that the earlier designations of certain wards emanated from 
the name of the proprietors or their residences, as Castle 
Baynard , Barring don, and Basinghall. We have before 
observed that some wards were hereditary, while others were 
transferrable, the purchaser becoming ex-officio an Alderman, 
No vestige remains by which we can ascertain in what manner 
the original subdivision of the city was apportioned; but in 
the year 1393, the Ward of Farringdon having greatly 
increased, was separated and distinguished as Farringdon 
within the walls, and Farringdon without, making the total 
number of wards twenty-five; and in 1550, the citizens, 
having purchased of Edward VI. the borough of Southwark, 
it was constituted the twenty-sixth ward; but the power 
granted them by charter not proving sufficiently authoritative 
to entitle them to exclude the jurisdiction of the magistrates 
of the county of Surrey, and their partial interference in its 
government, it was considered merely a nominal ward; 
serving to dignify the senior Alderman, called “ the Father of 
the City,” who generally, by bis age, is rendered unable to 




VOL. I. 


P 


106 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


sustain the fatigue of ward business, and the situation, 
therefore, reckoned an honourable sinecure. 

The original names of the wards were as follow; to which 
we have affixed the amounts raised by an assessment made in 
1339 by Edward III., in order to carry on his expensive wars 
for the conquest of France, which, being the first geneial 
assessment of the city recorded, shows the proportion the 
several wards were charged with, and those which were then 
esteemed the most opulent:— 


Amount of Assessment. Amount of Assessment. 



£. 

s. 



£. 

s. 

d. 

1. Ward Fori, or 




13. Candlewyc 




Foris . 

114 

13 

4 

Strete. 

. 133 

6 

8 

2. Lodgate and 




14. Langeford 

. 352 

6 

8 

Newgate 

730 

16 

8 

15. Cordewan 




3. Castle Baynard 

63 

6 

8 

Strete . 

.2,195 

3 

4 

4. Aldersgate 

57 

10 

0 

16. Cornhill 

. 315 

0 

0 

5. Bred Strete . 

461 

16 

8 

17. Lime Strete 

. 110 

0 

0 

6. Queenhythe . 

435 

13 

4 

18. Bishopsgate 

. 559 

6 

8 

7. Vintry . 

634 

16 

8 

19. Aldgate. 

. 30 

0 

0 

8. Dougate 

660 

10 

0 

20. Tower Ward 

. 365 

0 

0 

9. Wallbroke 

911 

0 

0 

21. Billingsgate 

. 763 

0 

0 

10. Coleman 




22. Bridge Ward 

. 765 

6 

8 

Strete 

1,051 

16 

8 

23. Lodingeber 

. 1,105 

10 

0 

11. Bassishaw 

79 

13 

4 

24. Portsoky 

27 

10 

0 

12. Cripplegate 

462 

10 

0 






Deeming the most eligible plan for communicating an 
accurate but succinct account of the various public buildings 
and different objects of interest throughout the city, will be 
to describe them in detailing the origin and description of 
the separate wards, we purpose now pursuing the general 






HISTORY OF LONDON. 


107 


history of the commerce and government of London, and 
in conclusion reverting to the wards from the period of their 
earliest authentic formation. 

We find, with few exceptions, that the internal condition of 
the city generally exhibited the character and disposition of 
the reigning sovereigns; the charters proving ineffectual in 
protecting the citizens from tallage, subsidies, or gifts, 
either to promote the political schemes, or alleviate the 
pressing emergencies of the crown, the civic character may 
be said, in great measure, to have fluctuated with the habits 
and humours of the Court; the dwelling of many of the 
nobility within the precincts of the city, vested the aristocracy 
with a certain degree of influence, and the possession of the 
Tower, as a regal fort and residence, created a constant and 
close connexion between the principal grades of society. The 
distracted reign, therefore, of Edward II. was little conducive 
to the peaceable government and disposition of the Lon¬ 
doners. The justice of the civic authorities seems to have 
been tainted by the vitiated example of the nobles, for we 
find them assuming an arbitrary jurisdiction over the com¬ 
monalty ; the Mayor and Aldermen retaining their authority 
during pleasure, and if they resigned, it was only for a 
limited space, and in favour of individuals of their own 
appointment; they levied taxes on the inhabitants, and dis¬ 
posed of the revenue as suited their purpose; taking upon 
themselves the expulsion of those Councilmen who stood 
forward in honest rectitude to protect the interests of their 
constituents. This tyrannical conduct led to remonstrances, 
cabals, and invectives, and from 1311 to 1322 the citizens 
existed in a perpetual state of excitement, until the King, 
under the specious pretext of arranging amicably the differ¬ 
ences, took the government of the city into his own hands, 


108 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


from which it was only redeemed on payment of 2,000/.; thus 
again evincing the uncertain tenure of the citys rights . 

The prodigal favours and riches lavished on the two 
Spencers * by Edward, alienated entirely the wavering affec¬ 
tions of Queen Isabella, who siding with the discontented 
Barons, led to the rebellion, in which the Londoners ulti¬ 
mately joined, espousing openly the cause of the Queen, and 
assisting, with forces and money, to liberate the kingdom from 
the thraldom of favouritism, and to establish Edward III. 
on the throne of his deposed father. 

In addition to the political commotions impeding the 
regular progress of commercial transactions during Edward 
the Second’s sovereignty, provisions had advanced to so 

* The Spencers, father and son, were banished at the dictation of the 
Barons, but soon restored to favour by the King; and as instancing the 
wealth the father had amassed, it is curious to note the principal items set 
forth in his petition to Edward against the Barons, praying indemnity for 
his losses, exemplifying, at the same time, the dangerous extent to which 
the favouritism of the Monarch might be carried in those days, and the 
monopolizing influence which became vested in the hands of a designing 
and insidious courtier, to the detriment of the public service. This mis¬ 
application of the revenue, and perverted channels into which the public 
money, set apart for beneficent purposes, has been, from time to time, 
directed by the Crown and its ministers, gradually conduced in exciting the 
popular clamour against the Pension List, and has tardily induced the 
Government of the day to investigate the merits and claims of the indi¬ 
viduals enjoying the Royal bounty. The elder Spencer’s real estate con¬ 
sisted of sixty-three manors; his personals of two crops of corn, one on the 
ground, the other in granary; in cash, jewels, silver, and golden utensils, 
10,000/.; armour for 200 men, warlike engines, and his houses, 30,000/.; 
the furnitures of his chapel and wardrobe, 5,000/.; 28,000 sheep, 1,000 oxen 
and horses, 1,200 cows, with their calves for two years; 40 mares, with 
their foals for two years ; 560 cart-horses, 2,000 hogs, 400 kids, 40 tuns of 
wine, 600 barons, 80 carcases of beef, 600 muttons in larder, 10 tuns of 
cyder, and 86 sacks of wool, with a library of books. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


109 


exorbitant a height, that the Government erroneously deemed 
itself bound again to interfere between buyer and seller, and 
place a restriction on the maximum range of prices. Thus 
an ox, grass-fed, was not to be sold for more than 16s., and if 
grain-fed, 24s.; a “best cow,” 12s.; best shorn mutton, Is. 4<7., 
&c. We are at the same time enabled to form an accurate 
estimate of the relative value between the exchangeable 
medium, silver , and other commodities, by an account handed 
down of the domestic disbursements of the Earl of Lancaster 
for the year 1313. It would appear that the total expen¬ 
diture of this nobleman’s household amounted to 7,309/., it 
being specially notified, in reference to the purchase of 
different silver articles, that silver was then worth Is. 8 d. per 
ounce, making twelve ounces of silver equivalent to a pound 
sterling. As illustrative also of the low price of the luxuries 
of life, one item sets forth 369 pipes of red wine, and two of 
white, costing only 104/. 17s. Qd. The impolicy, however, of 
thus affixing an arbitrary price on the principal commodities 
of existence, instead of allowing the natural operation of 
supply and demand to regulate their marketable value, became 
so apparent by holders refraining from sending their articles 
for sale, that the order was soon rescinded. In the year 
1316, the high price of wheat was mainly attributed to the 
quantity used for malt in London; and a Parliamentary edict 
was issued, prohibiting the use of wheat for this purpose, and 
also regulating the price of ale, the strongest malt liquor 
being sold at three halfpence per gallon , and the small one 
penny. Corn, however, continued to advance till it reached 
the starvation point of 53s. 4 d. per quarter, and, according to 
some authorities, even 80s.; the greatest famine visiting the 
land that had ever been experienced; “ parents eat their own 
children or those of others they could come at, as did the 
malefactors one another in prison; and here followed so 


110 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


terrible a mortality that the living scarce sufficed to bury the 
dead.* The country, however, the succeeding year, being 
blessed with an abundant and early harvest, wheat sustained a 
rapid decline, and sold at 10 cl. instead of 10s. per bushel, a 
reduction in value almost incredible, except we consider the 
diminished ratio of consumption from the effects of the 
previous mortality. In 1318, the Parliament being sum¬ 
moned to assemble at York, the King’s writ was issued to the 
Sheriffs of London to elect two members to represent their 
fellow-citizens in the “ Great Council of the nation.” In¬ 
stead, however, of tico , they returned three representatives; 
and by an Act passed in this Parliament, apportioning the 
number of soldiers to be furnished by each city against the 
Scots, London was ordered to provide 200 men, being Jive 
times the number of any other city, instancing, at this date, 
the comparative extent of its population and opulence. 

The reign of Edward III. not only shines forth con¬ 
spicuously in the annals of chivalry, holding forth the 
early promise of the brilliant career of the fine arts, but as 
the age when the commerce of the city widely expanded the 
sphere of its operation, occupying a more prominent position 
in the horizon of the mercantile world, while the -charters of 
the citizens were established on a more solid basis, and the 
trading fraternities re-constituted and identified with the 
State. The King, gratified at the able assistance afforded the 
Queen Mother, which was the means of placing him on the 
throne; had only two months swayed the sceptre, when he 
bestowed upon the citizens extensive immunities, comprised 
in a grant which may be termed the Golden Charter of the 
city. He not only confirmed all the ancient rights of the 
city, but annulled every innovation which had been made 
upon them from the earliest times. In order, likewise, to 
* Stow. Thos. Walsingham’s Hist. Angl.: Speed’s Chron. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Ill 


prevent, if possible, their future infraction or suspension, 
arising from any real or pretended misconduct of individuals 
temporarily vested with civic authority, it was expressly 
declared, “ that the liberties of the said city shall not be 
taken into the hands of Us or our Heirs, for any personal 
trespass or judgment of any minister of the said city. Neither 
shall a Gustos in the said city for that occasion be deputed; 
but tbe same minister shall be punished according to the 
quality of his offence;” in addition to which the following 
advantageous privileges were conferred:—The Mayor to be 
one of the judges to sit on the trial of prisoners confined in 
Newgate; the citizens to enjoy the right of infang-tlieft , that 
is, the privilege of trying a thief or robber, apprehended 
within the jurisdiction of the city; and of outfang-theft , which 
is the liberty of reclaiming a citizen taken in any other place, 
in order to bring him to his trial within the city: A right to 
the goods and chattels of all felons convicted within the j uris- 
diction of the city: the privilege of devising in mortmain, 
which is an alienation of lands and tenements to any guild, 
corporation or fraternity and their successors without the 
King’s leave, according to ancient custom—The Sheriffs of 
London and Middlesex to be amerced no otherwise than their 
brethren south of the river Trent: all foreign merchants to 
dispose of their merchandizes within forty days, thereby to 
prevent enhancing the prices of their several commodities: 
the King’s Marshal, Steward, nor Clerk of the Household, to 
exercise any authority in the city: the office of Escheator 
given in perpetuity to the Mayor. For the greater con¬ 
venience of the citizens resorting to country fairs, to have 
the valuable privilege of holding a court of “ Pye-Powder ” 
in such places, for settlement of all disputes that happen in 
each of the said fairs; or, in the words of the grant—“ that as 
the citizens were wont to have among themselves keepers to 


112 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


hold the pleas touching the citizens of the said city assembling 
at the said fairs, We will and grant that the same citizens may 
have such-like keepers to hold such pleas of their covenants 
as of ancient times they had, except the pleas of land, and of 
the Crown: ” that none of the King’s purveyors presume to 
rate any sort of goods belonging to the citizens, nor to deal in 
any sort of merchandize within the city, and that no market 
be kept within seven miles of the city of London.” In 
addition, the citizens obtained a grant of the 66 Village of 
Southwark for ever, by paying the farms thereof due and 
accustomed,” having represented to the King, that the village 
was the “ resort and lurking-place of various felons, thieves, 
and other malefactors, disturbers of the peace,” who infested 
the streets of London, rendering them at night unsafe to be 
traversed by the inhabitants, and on the perpetration of any 
crime they fled to Southwark, over which district the juris¬ 
diction of the city authorities did not extend. This great 
addition to their local power failed at first in producing the 
anticipated benefits in restraining the evil practices of the 
dissolute, several serious riots occurring, and “ people were 
assassinated, robbed, wounded, and killed in the streets;” 
the King, therefore, in the sixth year of his reign, was com¬ 
pelled to issue an edict “ prohibiting any one from wearing a 
coat of plate or weapon in the city of London or town of West¬ 
minster, or the suburbs thereof, on pain of forfeiting all his 
possessions.” The Mayor and magistrates, however, by 
adopting more energetic conduct, succeeded in partially 
checking these disgraceful occurrences. A quarrel happened 
between the Fishmongers’ and Skinners’ Companies, which 
they attempted to settle in the streets vi et armis , the rioters 
resisting at first the power of the magistrates, who however 
succeeded in securing the leaders of the conflicting parties, 
carried them directly to Guildhall, where, pleading guilty, 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


113 


they were beheaded in Westcheap, or Cheapside. This 
promptitude and decision of conduct had the effect of 
quelling, for a time, the riotous spirit of the age, and elicited 
the marked approbation of the act, the King issuing a 
patent in its justification and commendation. 

Though the commencement of Edward’s reign was thus 
marked by judicious laws to promote the best interests of the 
citizens, yet during the lengthened period that he swayed the 
sceptre, the civil and commercial state of the Londoners was 
subjected to much vicissitude; and it is to he regretted that 
the romantic love of chivalry imbued the King with too pre¬ 
dominating a feeling for heroic adventure and martial fame, 
goaded on by an inordinate desire of territorial aggrandize¬ 
ment and the acquirement of wealth by the uncertain tenure 
of foreign possession, which he allowed too much to divert 
his attention from the peaceful arts at home of commerce, 
manufactures, and agriculture, which he ought first to have 
cultivated as the legitimate source of his riches. But glory 
was the shrine at which “ he bowed the knee,” and we find 
him one year sacrificing to his ambition the success of that 
commerce, which the previous year he had laboured to estab¬ 
lish. No doubt sound and advantageous benefits resulted to 
the mercantile interest from several of his acts, but still many 
were thwarted or partially obviated from vacillations, the 
natural offspring of a character influenced by the impulses of 
any ruling passion. Thus in 1338 the admirals north and 
south of the Thames were empowered to compel the service 
of all merchant-vessels for an expedition against France, which 
created in the port of London a complete stagnation of trade. 
Besides which, he possessed himself of all the tin in the hands 
of the English as well as the foreign merchants, and ordered 
his wool-collectors to seize the wools belonging both to laity 
and clergy to make up a required deficiency of 17,500 sacks, 

Q 


VOL. I. 


114 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


m order to transmit to Antwerp, where the article found 
ready sale, the proceeds of which enabled him to fulfil his 
engagements with his allies. The foreign traffic had, how¬ 
ever, been gradually becoming more extensive, the customs 
of the port amounting in 1331 to 8,000/. per annum, which, 
considering the low rates of duties, shows a considerable 
increase from the year 1268. Great jealousy continued to 
prevail on the part of the citizens against the merchants from 
Flanders, Lombardy, and other parts of the Continent, and 
oppressions of various kinds were resorted to with the view 
of crushing their commercial efforts, until the interposition of 
the Crown became necessary, and a law was passed, honour¬ 
able to the Parliament, framed on the liberal principle of 
affording protection alike to the rights of the foreign as well 
as the native merchant. One of the main commercial objects 
the King seems ever to have held in view was, the re-estab¬ 
lishment of the woollen-manufacture ; and though his favourite 
project of conquering France frequently interrupted the 
execution of his design, yet he always lent an attentive ear 
to the appeals for justice made by the foreign cloth-weavers, 
a body of whom had settled in London under the authority 
of an Act of Parliament, passed in the eleventh year of his 
sovereignty. The meetings of the Flemish weavers were 
appointed to be held in the churchyard of St. Lawrence 
Poultney (the latter appellation being derived from the name 
of John Poultney , who founded a college adjoining the church 
dedicated to St. Lawrence); the Brabant weavers assembling 
in the churchyard of St. Mary Somerset , in Upper Thames- 
street, opposite Broken-wharf, and from the contiguity of the 
church to a small hythe or haven , called Sumner’s het or hythe, 
assumed the corrupted name of Somerset. In these places 
the woollen and linen cloths were exposed for sale at stated 
times, as was afterwards the custom in Cloth-fair, West 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


115 


Smithfield. In 1353 an Order in Council was issued for 
levying a tax of threepence on every sack of wool and every 
three hundred of wool-fells, and on other commodities carried 
either by land or water to the staple* at Westminster. The 
establishment of this wool-mart had occasioned so great a 
resort, that Westminster had increased to a considerable town, 
having before “ had no other dependence but the Iloyal re¬ 
sidence and adjacent Abbey.” This duty was raised for 
repairing the highway leading from the gate of London, called 
Temple-bar , to the gate of the Abbey at Westminster, the 
road, according to the Act, having, “ by the frequent passing 
of carts and horses, become so deep and miry, and the pave¬ 
ment so broken and worn as to be dangerous both to men 
and carriages, and as the proprietors of the houses near and 
leading to that staple have, by means of the thoroughfare, 

* It appears by a record preserved in the seventh volume of the 
“ Foedera,” that in the year 1375 the staple for the port of London had been 
removed from Westminster to that part of Holborn where Staple-inn now 
stands. It recounts that King Edward the Third having formerly made a 
grant to the dean and canons of the Chapel Royal of St. Stephen’s, in his 
Palace of Westminster (the place in which the House of Commons now 
sits), of 66/. 13s. 4c?. out of the rents of the Staple at Westminster, and the 
houses wherein the staple had been held remaining, for the most part empty, 
in consequence of the said removal; King Richard the Second, in 1380, 
made provision for the deficiency out of the Exchequer, to the said dean 
and canons. Thejurisdiction of the mayor and two constables of the staple 
of Westminster extended from Temple-bar to Tothill-fields, and their pro¬ 
ceedings were governed by a law-merchant. The principal matters under 
their cognizance were the five staple commodities of England, wool, and 
wool-fels, leather , lead, and tin. 

Some remains of the place where the staple at Westminster was kept, and 
particularly an old stone gate fronting the Thames, were in being till the 
year 1741, when they were pulled down to make room for the abutment of 
the new bridge over the Thames; and the place retained the name of the 
wool-staple till then, as appears by the Act of Parliament for the erection 
of the bridge. 


116 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


greatly raised their rents, the way before their houses should 
be paved at their charge, and where no houses are, should be 
paved anew out of the said duties.” Thus we find that the 
Strand still remained merely a road separating the City from 
Westminster, with houses interspersed, belonging chiefly to 
the nobility, whose different names and titles have since 
designated the several streets erected on the sites of the 
original mansions; and here it may be remarked, that the 
numerous additions made to the City beyond its ancient walls, 
commonly called its liberties , appear to have been taken in 
gradually, since no law is extant by which they are set out or 
to be ascertained, nor have any of its historiographers been 
able to discover the precise period when these improvements 
were made. This toll, with one of a similar nature granted 
seven years previously to the master of the hospital of St. 
Giles-in-the-fields and to John of Holborn, are the earliest on 
record collected in England for the repairs of a public road. 
The latter was levied for the purpose of repairing the highway, 
via regia , conducting from the said hospital near where the 
elegant structure of St. Giles now stands, to the bar of the 
Old Temple of London, namely, Holborn-bars , near which was 
erected the Old Temple or house of the Knights Templars, 
extending through another certain highway called Perpoole- 
lane , from the manor-house of that name, now Portpool-lane, 
including part of Gray’s-inn-lane, and likewise the highway 
called Charing, probably now St. Martin’s-lane, leading to 
the then village of Charing and its Cross, * erected by Edward 

* A portion of this cross remained till the civil wars in the reign of 
Charles the First, when it was destroyed by the Puritans as a monument of 
Popish superstition. After the restoration of Charles the Second, the 
equestrian statue of his ill-advised and unfortunate father, that had been 
taken down by order of Oliver Cromwell, but concealed by the Royalists 
during the Protectorate, was erected on the site of the ancient structure. 
The statue is by Lc Sueur, and a remarkably line specimen of his art. 








En^ d by I Woods 


MA 1ST 0 RD’S © C=D QJ K (g. [HI 

FROM 

(£ K1 ^ 03 0 K) © © & & a 


London, Published Feb y J 183 8 . b> ■ ’ S Orr & C° Amen Corner 


\ 














































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


117 


the First in memory of the death of his beloved Queen 
Eleanor. 

A re-organization of the various trading communities was 
also effected at this era.* Among the most material altera¬ 
tions may be enumerated their change of name from guilds to 
crafts and mysteries , and the substituting for the old title of 
alderman that of master or warden. A still more important 
advantage for promoting the interest of the companies, was • 
their being at this time first generally chartered, or having 
their privileges confirmed by letters patent, which they had 
only enjoyed through sufferance and the payment of their 
fermes. Exclusive of this right, however, the incorporations 
of Edward the Third were only partial, and comprehended but 
few of the privileges which the companies obtained from 
succeeding monarchs. They had no grant of a common seal 
even generally, liberty to buy or accept lands, to sue or be 
sued, and to possess various other liberties necessary to estab¬ 
lish them full incorporations as at present. 

The chartering, however, of the guilds by Edward the Third, 
was not that monarch’s only favour to them. Having found 

* About this time, in the year 1346, Edward the Third acquainted the 
public that his Parliament had agreed (18th Edward III., cap. 6), to the 
coining of three different coins of gold, viz., one piece of the value of six 
shillings, being the weight of two small florins of Florence, a second of half 
that value and weight, and a third of a quarter of the first. This gold was 
of twenty-three carats, three grains and a half fine, and half a grain in alloy. 
The standard of our silver coins was then eleven ounces and two penny¬ 
weights fine, and eighteen pennyweights alloy, called old sterling standard; 
and an ounce of silver weighed exactly twenty pennyweights, and was coined 
into twenty silver pence. Another proclamation was issued this same year, 
stating that three other gold pieces had been coined, viz., one of six shillings 
and eightpence value, which was named a gold noble, or half-mark; one 
of half that value, to be called a maille-nohle; and a third to he a quarter of 
the value of the first, and to be called a ferling or farthing-noble. This is 
the first instance of a gold coinage in England. 


118 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


that these fraternities were highly conducive to the extension 
of British commerce, and having conferred on them the means 
of giving stability to their mercantile associations, he wisely 
resolved to raise them in public estimation; and in order to 
effect this laudable resolution he became himself a brother of 
one of these societies, judging that his example would be 
soon followed by the Court. The linen-armourers , now 
“ merchant-tailors,” were then the great importers of woollen 
cloth, which we have shown his Majesty was desirous to make 
the staple manufacture of England, and therefore this 
company boasts the honour of first having had a Sovereign 
amongst their numbers. Richard the Second became a 
brother of the same company, and there were also enrolled 
as merchant-tailors , in Richard’s reign, four Royal dukes, 
ten earls, ten barons, and five bishops; the Skinners as well 
as the Mercers exhibited, about the same period, an equally 
splendid list of names, while other companies had a greater 
proportion of City dignitaries; the Grocers ,* towards the 

* By a petition from the Commons of the City to Parliament, printed 
amongst the Parliamentary Rolls, we learn that before the thirty-sixth of 
Edward the Third, certain wholesale merchants had formed themselves into 
a guild, which had become so great and monopolous, that they threatened 
to ruin the numerous other fraternities that had now sprung up; and this 
guild was the Grocers ,’ the origin of whose name we find explained by this 
document. The petition complains that those merchants called “ grossiers'’ 
or grossers, had by cover, and by orders made amongst themselves in their 
fraternities, engrossed all sorts of wares, whereby they suddenly raised the 
prices, and that they had laid up other merchandizes until times of dearth 
and scarcity. Ravenhill states, that the word grosser, or grocer, was a term at 
first distinguishing merchants in opposition to small traders, “ for they usually 
sold in gross quantities by great weights, dealing for the whole of any kind.” 
The grocers had seceded from the more ancient guild of the Pepperers, which 
latter fraternity was incorporated as grocers in 1345. The notification of 
being licensed to deal in pepper is still obliged to be specially inscribed over 
the doors of modem grocers. The remedy for the monopoly suggested by 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


119 


close of Edward’s reign enumerated sixteen aldermen among 
their body. 

In the forty-ninth of Edward, an enactment received the 
sanction of the whole assembly of the commonalty of the City, 
by which the right of election of all City dignitaries and 
officers, including members of Parliament, was transferred 
from the ward representatives to the trading companies , a few 
members of which were directed to be selected by the masters 
or wardens to come to Guildhall for election purposes; it was 
afterwards opened to all the liverymen of companies, in whose 
right the voting for the City’s Parliamentary members re¬ 
mained exclusively vested, till the passing of the “Reform 
Act,” which restored the elective franchise to the freemen of 
London, and further extended it to the inhabitant house¬ 
holders. 

The citizens, as succeeding eras progressively develop 
their character, seem ever to have maintained a decided prin¬ 
ciple of action, a sterlingness of behaviour throughout the 
fitful changes and severe ordeals to which they were subjected 
through the vacillating conduct of the different Sovereigns, 
and we constantly trace the same jealousy of their liberties, 
the same attachment to the constitution of the country, the 
same hospitality, munificence, and charity as signalize the 
London citizens and the London merchants of the present 
day; and with justice it may be added, that increase of wealth 
has only communicated augmented means of doing good, while 
the lapse of time has not rendered them less watchful and 
scrupulous of the privileges conferred on them by their 

the petitioners and acceded to was, that “ merchants shall deal in or use but 
one kind or sort of merchandize, and that every merchant hereafter shall 
choose which kind of wares or merchandize he will deal in, and shall deal 
in no other.”— Herbert's History of the Twelve Great Livery Companies of 
London .— Anderson's History of Commerce. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


120 

charters. Thus, while we find the citizens in the olden time 
good and devout Catholics, as steadfast in the defence of their 
religious as their commercial rights, yet they allowed reason 
to remove the mists of bigotry in which the age was benighted, 
not yielding a blind belief in the infallibility of the priest¬ 
hood; for at a provincial Synod held in London in 1342 
it was decreed, that whoever should be prevailed upon by the 
friars and monks to make their wills at the point of death 
in prejudice of their families, should be deprived of the 
benefit of Christian burial. On the other hand they showed 
themselves ready to defend, at the risk of their lives, the 
person of their Bishop, towards whom they had reason to 
imagine personal violence was likely to be offered by the Duke 
of Lancaster, at the assembly held at St. Paul’s, to which 
Wichliff had been cited to answer for the presumed heretical 
doctrines he was promulgating, in opposition to the tenets of 
the Church of Rome. This exhibition of religious feeling, in 
hostility to Edward’s princely son, was afterwards the source 
of serious disquietude to the citizens during the declining 
years of the King, even to the endangering the loss of their 
right to appoint a fellow-citizen to the civic chair; though in 
1346 the election of the Lord Mayor had been vested in the 
mayor and aldermen for the time being, and in such of the 
principal inhabitants of each ward as should be summoned to 
attend. 

As a marked indication of Royal favour, Edward, in the 
twenty-eighth year of his sovereignty, bestowed upon the 
mayor the privilege of having gold and silver maces carried 
before him, a privilege previously appertaining only to Royalty ; 
at the same time that all other towns and cities were, by a Royal 
precept, expressly commanded not to use maces of any other 
metal than copper; and from this date, 1354, it is assumed 
that the addition of Lord was first annexed to the title of 


HISTORY OF LONDON'. 


1*21 


Mayor of the City, there being no other record to which 
the event can be referred. 

It was to be expected that during the military career of a 
warlike Prince like Edward the Third, various displays of 
the chivalrous spirit of the age would form a prominent 
feature in the pageants of the day and the amusements of 
the people. Smithfield was chiefly the arena on which many 
a gallant knight ran a course at the gorgeous tournaments 
held within the precincts of the City; but in 13*29 several 
ambassadors having arrived from France, the King, anxious 
to display the gallantry of his subjects, entertained them with 
a solemn tournament held in Clieapside , between the cross at 
the end of Wood-street and that of Soper-lane , or Queen-street; 
and another of the most splendid character was appointed by 
Edward, when, enfeebled from age in mind and body, he 
allowed the destinies of the country to be “ too much in¬ 
fluenced by the intrigues of his 4 lady-love/ Alice Perrers or 
Pierce. At this celebrated tilt, Alice appeared under the 
dignified appellation of the Lady of the Sun, drawn in a 
triumphal chariot, dressed in sumptuous apparel, attended by 
a number of ladies of quality, each of whom led a knight by 
his horse’s bridle, accompanied by a number of the principal 
Lords, most richly accoutred; the magnificent procession 
setting out from the Tower through Clieapside to Smithfield , 
where many courageous feats were performed by the young 
nobility and gentry for seven days.” 

In 1357 the citizens had a glorious opportunity of manifest¬ 
ing their loyalty and patriotism in receiving, with all the 
honours due to the illustrious hero of the age, Edward the 
Black Prince , on his triumphal entrance into London after 
the victorious battle of Poictiers, bringing as a trophy of his 
redoubtable valour, John, King of France, captive in his 
train. The conquering Prince was met in Southwark by 

VOL. 1. R 


1*22 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


more than five thousand citizens on horseback, most of them 
richly dressed. The mayor, aldermen, sheriffs, and the 
several companies 66 in their formalities with stately pageants,” 
met the procession at London, and the streets through which 
the nation’s triumph passed were decorated with the richest 
tapestries, with a profusion of plate, silks, and furniture, 
exhibited as demonstrative of the wealth of the inhabitants; 
and quantities of bows, arrows, shields, helmets, coats of mail, 
swords, and spears, were exposed in the balconies, windows, 
and shops, impressing strongly the idea of the power and 
martial character of the English. The cavalcade lasted from 
three in the morning till noon. Notwithstanding these in¬ 
centives to military ardour, with which it might have been 
supposed the people would have been stimulated—at a time, 
too, when the advantages accruing to the nation from the use 
of the long-bow were so illustriously exemplified in the fields 
of Cressy and Poictiers , when the glory of the English archers 
was in its zenith—it strikes us as a great anomaly to find 
that the pursuits of various useless, dishonest, and unlawful 
games, as hurling of iron bars, stones, and wood, of hand-ball, 
foot-ball, bandy-ball, and cambuck or cock-fighting, almost en¬ 
grossed the popular pastime; so much so, as to occasion Edward 
to send a letter of complaint upon the subject to the sheriffs 
of London, declaring that the skill in shooting with arrows was 
almost totally laid aside, and that in a short time the realm 
was likely to become destitute of archers; commanding them 
to prevent the prevailing idle practices, and to see that the 
leisure time upon holidays was spent in recreations with bows; 
in furtherance of which, a penalty was ordered in 1349 to be 
inflicted on offenders, by imprisonment during the King’s 
pleasure. In the immediately succeeding reigns the renewal 
of similar orders was found necessary. In the sixteenth 
century heavy complaints were made respecting the disuse of 


HISTORY OF LONDON, 


123 


the long-bow, especially in the vicinity of London; and Stow 
informs us, that before his time it was customary at Bartho- 
lomew-tide for the Lord Mayor, with the Sheriffs and Aider- 
men, to go into the fields at Finsbury, where the citizens were 
assembled, and shoot at the standard with broad and flight 
arrows for games. In the reign of Henry the Eighth, how¬ 
ever, a revival of this manly sport had taken place; and at a 
great archery meeting at Windsor, a citizen of London, named 
Barlow, an inhabitant of Shoreditch, joined the archers and 
surpassed all the assembly in skill, at which his Majesty was 
so much pleased, that he jocosely gave him the title of Duke 
of Shoreditch , a distinguishing honour which the captain of 
the London archers retained for a considerable time after¬ 
wards. In 1583, during the reign of Elizabeth, a grand 
archery match was held in London, the Duke of Shoreditch 
summoning a suit of nominal nobility under the titles of 
marquis of Clerkenwell, of Barlow, of Islington, of Hoxton, 
of Shacklewell, earl of Pancras, &c- The companies proceeded 
in pompous march from Merchant-tailors’ hall, consisting of 
three thousand archers, as Strype says, “ oddly habited,” nine 
hundred and forty-two wearing chains of gold. They passed 
through Broad-street, the residence of their captain, thence 
into Moorfields, and thence to Smithfield, where, having per¬ 
formed several evolutions, they shot at a target for honour. 
A similar meeting was made by the London archers in 1682, 
in the reign of Charles the Second, the King himself being 
present. But at the close of the seventeenth century legis¬ 
lative interference failed in keeping alive the popular feeling 
in favour of the bow, and its use gradually became discon¬ 
tinued, owing, in great measure, to the various enclosures 
made in the neighbourhood of London, thus depriving the 
citizens of room sufficient for the exercise, and in part, from 
the general adoption of the musket. Fashion in more modern 


1*24 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


times has, however, prevented the total extinction of the noble 
craft of the bow; and honourable instances of skill in archery 
have been exhibited by the company of 44 Toxophilites,” and 
other societies of Bowmen and Bowwomen ; many of our fair 
countrywomen, in later days, having 44 twanged the yew” with 
as unerring skill as their eyes have shot forth darts from 
Cupid’s quiver; while in no diversion does the position afford 
so favourable an opportunity of effectively displaying 64 the 
line of beauty” of the finely-moulded form of woman’s elegant 
figure. 

Now that the population of London was becoming more 
dense, and the houses more thickly crowded together, few 
years elapsed without the City being visited with that dreadful 
Scourge of humanity, the plague. The narrow streets, in 
which the current of air was either obstructed by architectural 
projections, or by signs across tbe street, together with the 
want of cleanliness, owing to the inefficient supply of water 
and the difficulty in preventing the accumulation of filth in 
the streets, did much to increase, if not to generate the dis¬ 
temper, which proved at various periods so fatal to the in¬ 
habitants of the metropolis. In the middle ages, the church¬ 
yards groaned with the accumulation of bones of the dead, 
piled up and exposed to the air which they contributed to 
corrupt ; the streets were filled with garbage and filth, which 
no exercise of authority seems to have been able to force the 
inhabitants to remove; the sewers, which generally ran above 
ground, were in a neglected state; while the dirty, sluttish 
habits within doors corresponded with the filthiness of the 
streets without. In 1348, during the rejoicings for Edward 
the Third’s conquest of Calais, a disastrous pestilence, which 
was said to have spread from India over all the western 
countries, reached England, destroying immense numbers of 
inhabitants; and it was computed that in London not more 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


125 


than one in ten survived. The usual places of sepulture not 
being large enough to receive the bodies, several humane in* 
dividuals were induced to purchase grounds for burial; and in 
one enclosure appropriated by Sir Walter Maury, comprising 
thirteen acres, there were buried 50,000. The reduction 
which took place in the price of provisions from the con¬ 
sequent falling off in the consumption deserves note; for 
instance, a horse previously worth 40s. sold at 6s. 8 d., a best ox 
at 4s., do. cow Is., a best heifer or steer 6d., a wether sheep, 4 d., 
an ewe 3^/., and a lamb 2d., a best hog 5 d., and a stone of wool 
was not worth more than 9 d. Wines also were sold at very 
low prices, Gascony obtaining only Ad., and Rhenish 6d. per 
gallon. Wheat suffered, likewise, considerable fluctuations 
in its value throughout the reign of Edward, either from 
scarcity of money, owing to the exhaustion of the nation’s 
resources, chiefly in prosecution of the Scottish war, or from 
dearths occasioned by failure in the crops, or the ravages of 
the plague causing the supply to exceed the demand. Thus 
we find in 1335, wheat realized the enormous sum of 40s. per 
quarter, while in the succeeding year it is quoted at 2s.; and 
again in 1359, 1369, and 1370, selling 44 at the excessive 
prices” of 24s. and 26s. 8 d. per quarter. These sudden altera¬ 
tions in the currencies of the staple commodity of life would 
lead to the conclusion that ruinous losses must have been 
sustained by the agriculturists of the day; and it is therefore 
necessary, in order to form a just estimation of the outlay of 
the grower, that the value of land should be specified, which 
we are enabled to do from Bishop Fleetwood’s 44 Chronicon 
Preciosum,” wherein it appears that eighty acres of arable 
land were worth 205. per annum, or 3d. per acre, meadow-land 
being let at Ad., and pasture Id. per acre. 

As early as the year 1361 the prevalence of the plague was 
attributed to the want of cleanliness in the streets of the City, 


1*26 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


fears being entertained that the disease which raged that year 
in France might be communicated to London, or revived by 
the putrid blood and entrails of beasts which the butchers 
used to throw into the streets. Edward, by way of precaution, 
issued a command to the mayor and sheriffs, stating that from 
these practices “ abominable and most filthy stinks proceeded, 
sicknesses and many other evils having happened to such as 
had abode in the City or resorted theretoand that in future 
no animals should be slaughtered nearer London than the 
town of Stratford on the one part, and the town of Knights - 
bridge on the other. Three hundred years later, in the eventful 
periods of 1625 and 1665, the plague was still attributed to 
the want of cleanliness, and the tracts of those times teem 
with complaints on the subject. “ Let not carcasses of horses, 
dogs, cats, and other animals lye rotting and poisoning the air 
as they have done in More and Finsbury-fields and elsewhere 
round the citie, whence arise unsavory stenches, and these 
foetid smells are the maintaining cause of the contagion.” In 
the succeeding year, 1666, occurred the “ great fire” of 
London, which, though devastating in its progress, causing 
misery and ruin at once dreadful and appalling, was yet ulti¬ 
mately productive of more beneficial effects than any con¬ 
flagration recorded in history. Indeed, it is the opinion of 
many able writers of the day that the fire was the “ one thing 
needed” radically to exterminate the disease, as there is strong 
reason for believing that for some centuries the City was not 
before this period wholly free from infection. It is not, 
therefore, too much to infer, that had it not been for this 
calamity, London might much longer have suffered from the 
pestilence. Instead of narrow dirty streets, however, without 
any free circulation of air, a new city arose improved in all 
the conveniences of life. This would not have occurred for 
ages in the regular course of events. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


127 


It is needless reciting the melancholy detail of each par¬ 
ticular year, 

“ When Contagion with mephitic breath 
And wither’d Famine urg’d the work of death j” 

yet, perhaps, a brief description of the last plague which 
passed with pestiferous blast over the devoted walls of London, 
while it affords a faint picture of those previous awful visita¬ 
tions to which the City was subjected, may render us the more 
thankful, that in this our day, we can daily walk the streets of 
the metropolis without the dread of inhaling air pregnant 
with deadly infection. It was towards the close of the year 
1664 that the plague first broke out in Long-acre, when two 
or three persons dying suddenly, the frightened neighbours 
took the alarm and removed into the City, whither they are 
supposed unfortunately to have carried the infection. There, 
from the denseness of the population, it gathered strength, and 
its ravages rapidly augmented. A frost which set in in Decem¬ 
ber, and continued three months, suspended its dire effects; 
but at the close of February, 1665, the thaw commencing, 
the plague began again to increase, and when it was found 
that several parishes were infected, the magistrates issued an 
order that every house visited with the contagion should be 
shut up, and marked with a red cross bearing the inscription, 
44 Lord, have mercy upon us,” none of the inmates being 
allowed egress. This impolitic measure was attended with 
most distressing consequences; for, though the extension of 
the infection may have been thus partially checked, yet 
whole families were sacrificed, who might have escaped had 
they been allowed to quit the house on the first appearance 
of the disease. In the months of May, June, July, it con¬ 
tinued with more or less power, until in August and September 
it quickened into horrible activity, sweeping away 4,000, 
8,000, and even 12,000 souls in one week; and at its height 


128 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of fatality 4,000 perished in one night. All business was 
paralysed; the minister often received the stroke of death 
in the exercise of his sacred office; the physician, finding no 
assistance in his own antidotes, died while administering them 
to others; the very bells seemed hoarse with tolling; and the 
dead were now no longer numbered, for the parish clerks and 
sextons perished in the execution of their office. In the 
parish of Stepney alone, 116 sextons, gravediggers, and carters 
employed in removing the bodies, died in one year. Those 
moving sepulchres, the 44 dead carts,” continually traversed the 
streets, while the appalling cry, 44 Bring out your dead,” 
thrilled through every human frame within whom the spark 
of life still lingered. Then it was that parents, husbands, 
wives, and children saw all that was dear to them thrown with 
a pitchfork into a cart, like the offal of the slaughter-house, 
to be conveyed without the walls, and flung into one pro¬ 
miscuous heap. In the last week of September, this human 
scourge mitigated its fell attacks, at which time upwards of 
10,000 houses were deserted; and, according to Defoe, 
100,000 victims were offered as human sacrifices to the want 
of cleanliness, conveniences, and bad construction of the 
streets and houses. 

Even the survivors in this year of desolation would have 
perished of famine but for the charitable contributions of the 
affluent. The money subscribed is said, each week, to have 
amounted to 100,000/., to which Charles the Second gave 
1,000/.; in the parish of Cripplegate alone, the disbursements 
to the poor amounted to 17,000/. a-week. The conduct of 
the magistracy redounded infinitely to their honour, and 
Darwin has justly lauded, in verse, the heroic devotion of Sir 
John Laurence, 44 London’s Generous Mayor.” Space will 
not permit us to detail, even in the most cursory manner, the 
numerous anecdotes of the most 44 heart-rending miseries and 












©GJJ Rfl © E m LAK1 E) TEDSK^ 
RE GENTS PARK. 























































































» 














* 





















■ 






















. 








' 





















wt 







































' 



■ 


























HISTORY OF LONDON. 


129 


trials” with which the people of any nation were ever visited; 
we shall, therefore, conclude our mournful narrative of this 
epoch in the calamities of the City with the traditionary 
account of a narrow escape of a poor Scotch piper , whose 
remembrance has been immortalized by that great sculptor, 
Cibber , in a statue well known in Tottenham-court-road, 
representing a Highland piper with his dog and keg of liquor 
by his side. It is to be premised, that many were the in¬ 
stances in which, the stupor of disease having been mistaken 
for the sleep of death, the sufferer was buried beneath a mass 
of the dead; and sometimes bodies, yet warm and breathing, 
met the same fate. Reverting, however, to the piper , it 
appears, he was accustomed usually to stand at the bottom 
of Holborn-hill, near St. Andrew’s church. Having one day 
met some of his countrymen and drank too freely, he was 
glad to find repose on the steps of the church. The nightly 
“dead cart” passing by during his slumbers, one of the men 
hesitated not in putting his fork into the piper’s belt, and 
transferring him from a bed of stone to one of death. The 
piper’s faithful dog attempted to prevent the forcible capture 
of his master; but, unable to succeed, he determined not to 
forsake him, and, leaping into the cart, began to howl most 
piteously over the body. The jolting of the cart and moans 
of the dog aroused the piper from his lethargy, who in¬ 
stinctively turning to his pipes, struck up one of his native 
spirit-stirring pibrochs, to the great terror of the drivers, who 
fancied their cart haunted “ with ghosts and goblins, or spirits 
damneduntil lights having been procured, the piper was 
released from his deadly company, and his narrow escape w'as 
communicated by one of his benefactors, who employed Cibber 
to execute a statue of him. 

Richard the Second, in 1377, unfortunately ascended the 
throne at too early an age, being only eleven years old, for 


VOL. i. 


s 


130 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the City to anticipate much solid or permanent benefit to 
result to their mercantile and corporate interest during his 
rule, unless the youthful Monarch had been gifted with more 
than usual strength of mind and philosophical reasoning far 
beyond his years, to have rendered him proof against the 
multiform temptations arising from pleasures, which the pos¬ 
session of apparently unbounded riches rendered subservient 
to his will. Had he escaped this Scylla of the regal state, the 
Charybdis which awaited him was more likely to wreck his 
prudent intentions, created by the adulation of courtiers, who 
so adulterate the stream through which the clear waters from 
the fountains of truth have to flow, that they reach royalty 
divested of all their purity, and have been so perverted froni 
their simple and straight current, that it requires an acuteness 
of judgment, and highly reflective organization hardly to be 
hoped for, to enable the human mind to penetrate the illusive 
veil thus artfully thrown over actions and things. This 
perception of facts through a false medium, seeing “ through 
a glass darkly,” has been too often the bane of those who are 
immaturely impressed with the feeling and knowledge that 
they have only to will , to have. A portion, however, of the 
first years of his reign was marked by traits of decision and 
firmness of conduct, which led to more favourable predictions 
than his after actions realized. Unlike his amiable father, 
the Black Prince, he grew up rash and inconsiderate, irri¬ 
tating his friends into estrangement, and exciting his enemies 
to rebellious opposition; even the citizens, infected by the 
manners of the Court, were often tumultuous, inconsistent, 
and irregular in their proceedings. One of the King’s first 
acts was his reconciliation of the Duke of Lancaster with 
the City, after which his Majesty made his grand entrance 
from Sheen ( Richmond ) into London, and for which the most 
magnificent preparations were made ; exhibiting at once 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


131 


the prodigality as well as the fanciful but not inelegant 
character of the pageantry and entertainments of the day. 
The cavalcade, when it reached Cheapside, stopped opposite 
a large conduit erected in the form of a castle, from which 
flowed white and purple streams of wine. Four beautiful 
girls, as Hebes , about the age of the King, supplied the 
Sovereign and nobility with wine in golden goblets, throwing 
gilt flowers on the King’s head, and scattering Danae showers 
of florins among the populace.—Again, when the King 
favoured the City with his presence, he was escorted by 
four hundred of the citizen's, in superb dresses, to London- 
bridge, where he was presented with a stately courser, richly 
trapped with golden brocade, and his Queen with a white 
palfry with furniture equally splendid. His arrival was greeted 
by thousands of joyous citizens; the houses by which he 
passed were decorated with cloths of gold, silver, and silks; 
the conduits ran with the choicest wines, and at every step 
costly gifts were heaped on the Royal personages. At the 
standartl in Cheapside was a splendid pageant, on which stood 
a boy, personifying an angel, who offered the King wine in 
a golden cup, and placed on his head a rich crown of gold, 
44 most curiously garnished with precious stones and pearls 
of great value, and the same on the head of the Queenafter 
which he was given two gilt silver basins, each containing a 
thousand gold nobles, together with a curious picture of the 
Trinity, valued at 800/., a gilt silver table for an altar, worth 
a thousand marks, besides other presents of great value. 

These exhibitions were not only profuse and extravagant, 
idly dissipating immense sums in vain ostentation, but ex¬ 
tremely impolitic, as impressing the Court and nobility with 
the belief, that the wealth of the citizens was like an in¬ 
exhaustible mine from whence resources could* be drawn at 
pleasure. If, therefore, loans of money were refused to the 


132 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Royal demand, the denial was supposed to proceed not from 
inability, but requiring only a high pressure system to force 
a reluctant compliance. In fact, these civic shows reflect 
little credit on the wisdom or foresight of the citizens of yore; 
and the extortions and amercements to which they were 
subjected from the Crown, were encouraged by their own 
imprudence and ostentation. 

In the second year of the King’s reign, a subsidy was 
granted by Parliament to cover the expenses incurred in the 
wars carried on in France and Flanders, by which all men 
were assessed according to their several qualities or stations 
in life, and which assumed the name of the “ poll-tax trades¬ 
men, mechanics, &c., w T ith their wives and children, were taxed 
at fourpence per head; all persons, in fact, above fifteen years 
of age; or, according to Fabian , fourteen years. On this 
occasion the Lord Mayor was rated as an earl at four pounds, 
and the aldermen as barons at two pounds each; which 
would imply that the epithet of “ Right Honourable” had 
been already attached to the mayoralty. Exclusively 8 of the 
onerous nature of this new imposition, the mode of collection 
became the crying grievance of the land, the Government 
agents resorting to the most brutal and indecent behaviour 
towards the female portion of the lower classes in endeavouring 
to ascertain their age. The excitement of the people became 
at length so violent, that on one of the collectors having 
rudely treated the daughter of a man named Wat Hilliard , 
by profession a Tyler , known afterwards as “ Wat Tyler,” 
resident at Dartford, in Kent, the father became so irritated, 
that he knocked out the fellow’s brains, and, to save himself 
from prosecution, easily persuaded the populace to rise in his 
defence, and endeavour to extricate themselves from the heavy 
yoke of taxation under which they had so long groaned. 
Hence arose, in 1381, the most dangerous rebellion that ever 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


133 


threatened England, and which shook the pillars of the throne 
to their very foundation; its suppression proving as mira¬ 
culous as its rise and progress had been unprecedentedly rapid 
and foreboding. On the arrival of the rebels at Maidstone, 
they released from prison a fanatic priest named John Ball , 
who had been excommunicated, and confined for his seditious 
preachings, and was a fit instrument to co-operate with the 
factious insurgent, Wat Tyler. A congenial spirit to the 
text which he adopted from an old proverb, 

“ When Adam delv’d, and Eve span, 

Who was then a gentleman ,” 

at once exemplifies the specious principles of equality which 
he instilled into his hearers; and from such tenets, the results 
which followed may be readily conceived. The rebel army 
encamped on Blackheath 100,000 strong, and on the King 
refusing to come at their bidding and hear their demands, they 
marched to London, vowing destruction to the nobility, and 
especially the members of the legal profession, committing 
numerous acts of incendiarism and murder. Admittance was 
gained into the City, and the work of devastation commenced. 
One of the divisions of the forces, under the command of Wat 
Tyler, was posted about West Smithfield, and terms were 
offered by the King similar to those which had been acceded 
to by the Essex division. These, however, were not satis¬ 
factory to the rebellious chief, who was in consequence invited 
to a conference with the King at Smithfield , to which place he 
marched his confederates, consisting of from twenty to thirty 
thousand. The moment Wat Tyler caught sight of the King, 
in Smithfield, he left his companions, whom he ordered to 
halt, “ and setting spurs to his horse stopped not till he 
touched the croupier of the King’s horse,” whom he rudely 
accosted; and his general demeanour was so insolent and over¬ 
bearing, that the King’s attendants suggested the propriety of 


134 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


having him arrested. In order to put this bold design into 
execution in the face of a hostile force which outnumbered 
the Royal party, as hundreds to units, the Lord Mayor 
Walworth, as magistrate of the jurisdiction, was ordered 
to execute it. This, on the impetus of the moment, he 
dauntlessly performed, by striking Tyler heavily on the head 
with his sword, causing the traitor to stagger and fall from 
his horse, who was soon despatched by the attendants, and 
the body thrown into the Hospital of St. Bartholomew. At 
the sight of their chieftain’s death, the rebels furiously ex¬ 
claimed, “ Our captain is murdered, let us revenge his death,” 
and immediately bent their bows. The King, with an extra¬ 
ordinary presence of mind in a youth of fifteen, boldly dashed 
forward with his horse, crying out, “ What , my friends ! will 
you kill your King ? Be not troubled for the loss of your 
leader , I will be your captain , and grant what you desire” 
This heroic conduct seems to have awed the rebels into tem¬ 
porary submission, and they passively followed the King to 
St. George’s-fields. In the meantime, the mayor and alderman 
Philpot , assisted by aldermen Brembre and Laund , raised on 
the moment one thousand citizens completely armed, and 
sent them so expeditiously, under the guidance of Sir Robert 
Knowles, to the King’s assistance, that the rebels threw down 
their arms and sued for mercy. Jack Straw, who was second 
in command, previously to his execution confessed, that it had 
been resolved by him and his accomplices to sack and burn 
the City on the evening of the very day in which Wat Tyler 
was killed, and to have murdered all the nobility and principal 
citizens. We have thus minutely recounted this insurrection, 
so celebrated in English history, as it places the gallant 
behaviour of the London citizens in a brilliant light, reflecting 
on them a blaze of glory which will gild their memory to 
the latest posterity. The Lord Mayor, William Walworth , 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


135 


with the aldermen Philpot , Brembre , and Laund , were meri¬ 
toriously knighted, and the Mayor was further rewarded with a 
fee farm-rent of 100/. per annum, and the other aldermen with 
40/. annually, and Sir William Walworth’s memory has been 
perpetuated in the name of a suburban village which gave 
him birth. 

An erroneous opinion has become prevalent that the dagger, 
represented in the City armorial bearings, was granted as an 
honorary distinction by Richard in commemoration of the 
heroic action of the Mayor; but it appears that in the fourth 
year of the King’s reign, and a year previous to the in¬ 
surrection, it was agreed and ordained, at a full assembly in 
the upper chamber of Guildhall, that the ancient seal of office 
being deemed too small and unbecoming the dignity of the 
City, a new one should be adopted, “ made in a more 
masterly manner, in which, besides the images of St Peter 
and St Paul , was placed the shield of the arms of the said 
city well engraved, supported by two lions, and with two more 
on each side of the arms, and two niches containing two 
angels, between whom, over the images of the apostles, sate 
the image of the Virgin Mary.” The cross and sivord are 
therefore to be considered emblematical of St. Paul, and not 
the dagger of Sir William Walworth. 

While descanting on the characters of the different civic 
dignitaries of this epoch, we must not omit eulogizing that of 
Sir John Philpot This brave and worthy citizen fitted out 
a fleet at his own expense, which he manned with a thousand 
able seamen, taking the command himself, in order to check 
the piracies of a Scotch adventurer named Mercer , who had 
for some time considerably harassed the coasting trade, and 
captured several merchantmen. After a severe engagement, 
Mercer was defeated, and most of his vessels captured by the 
victorious Londoner. Again, when the Government sent a 


136 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


powerful fleet and army to the assistance of the Duke of 
Bretagne against France, Sir John, then Lord Mayor, hired 
a considerable number of ships, and redeemed the armour and 
arms of upwards of a thousand soldiers, which they had been 
obliged to pawn to procure the necessaries of life. He also 
caused the City ditch to be cleansed, and rated each house¬ 
holder only at the small sum of Jivepence. We have specified 
this sum, in order to show the wages given to a labourer at 
that time, which was the amount paid by each householder. 
In fact, Sir John appears to have been for many years “ the 
pillar of the City,” “the head, heart, and hand of London.” 
His unflinching integrity in Parliament in defending the rights 
of his fellow-citizens, and averting the threatened innovation 
of their privileges, added to his indefatigable zeal in its in¬ 
ternal good government, fully exemplified that its welfare was 
cherished as the dearest object of his existence. 

Sir William Walworth was succeeded in the mayoralty by 
alderman Northampton, whose character forms a striking 
contrast with that of the brave and patriotic Sir John Philpot; 
for, though the promoter of some beneficial regulations, yet 
the violence of his disposition led him into seditious outrages, 
which ultimately caused the confiscation of his property and 
his perpetual imprisonment. He succeeded, however, in a 
great measure, in curbing the licentiousness and immorality 
too prevalent among citizens; though, for his practical ethics , 
he incurred the displeasure of the clergy, who looked upon 
his interference as an innovation of their authority. The 
same motives, however, instigated him as those which induced 
the magistrates at a later period of the reign to take the 
punishment of the various immoral transgressions into their 
own hands, in consequence of the negligence and partiality of 
the clergy and spiritual courts, “ who connived at licentious¬ 
ness for a bribe.” 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


137 


In 1383 a gleam of joy burst forth amidst the gloom and 
oppression which were rising on the horizon of the City’s 
prospects : Richard, at the recommendation of his Parliament, 
confirmed all former charters and grants, professing to hold 
inviolate the rights and liberties of the citizens. But, not¬ 
withstanding this solemn contract, the Constable of the Tower 
shortly afterwards succeeded in establishing his right of dues 
on certain commodities entering the port of London; such as 
possession of all craft found adrift between London-hridge 
and Gravesend, all swans and stray animals floating past the 
Tower, &c., which proved a constant subject of irritation even 
so late as the reign of James the First, when the custom was 
abrogated. About this time Richard fixed the prices of 
Rhenish, Gascoigne, and Spanish wines at 6d. per gallon in 
London and other towns, and if sent into the country, the 
price was not to be raised more than a halfpenny per gallon 
for every fifty miles of land-carriage. In 1386 the walls had 
become considerably dilapidated, and houses on the exterior 
were built contiguous to them. On an anticipated invasion 
from France by Charles the Sixth, the walls were ordered 
to be repaired, the houses pulled down, and the ditch 
cleansed; but on the alarm subsiding, the work of reparation 
was discontinued. 

The extravagance of the King was now becoming un¬ 
bounded, and his Court was unrivalled in splendour. He is 
said to have maintained six thousand persons daily in his 
palace; some authorities enumerate them at ten thousand. 
His whole establishment of cooks, at the different Royal 
residences, is reported to have been two thousand; and some 
appeared to have been deeply versed in the gastronomic art , as 
is instanced in a curious work entitled the “ Forme of Cury,” 
compiled about 1390 by the master-cooks of this luxurious 
monarch, in which are preserved recipes for the most ex- 


VOL. 1, 


T 


138 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


quisite dishes of the age. In order to obtain resources to 
meet his enormous expenses, infringements, as usual, were 
made on the privileges of the citizens under the most frivolous 
pretexts; remonstrances were construed into presumption 
and unwarrantable questioning of the supreme pleasure and 
authority of the Crown, and mulcts and extortions ensued, 
even to the forcing some of the eminent citizens to sign and 
seal blank papers, which were afterwards filled up with sums 
that were found suitable to the convenience of the Court. 
Such is a specimen of the 44 good olden times,” which ought to 
make the citizens reckon, beyond all price, the constitutional 
liberty they now enjoy. At this crisis of the nation, we behold 
the London merchants standing forth in bold relief in this 
dreary picture of the people’s wrongs, stern and inflexible as 
mediators, not alone for their brother citizens, but between 
the kingdom’s grievances and the oppressive acts of a vicious 
Government. Sir Simon Sudbury , with a deputation of 
London and provincial citizens, sought an audience of the 
King at Windsor, and represented, in nervous but respectful 
language, the gross abuses under which his subjects laboured, 
begging the speedy summoning of a Parliament to redress 
the evils. The King at first gave an evasive answer, which 
called forth the following spirited ebullition of a frank remon¬ 
strance :— 44 With humble submission to his Majesty, justice 
was never less practised in England than at present, and that 
by the subtle management of certain persons it was im¬ 
possible for him to come at the truth of things, seeing the 
ministers found it their interest to conceal from him the 
management of his afiairs; in consideration of which they 
(the citizens) did not think it consistent with their interest, 
nor that of the kingdom, to wait the meeting of Parliament, 
seeing a speedier remedy might be applied, by calling to 
account those individuals who had plundered and embezzled 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


139 


the public treasure, and to inquire how these immense sums, 
raised for nine years past, had been applied ; and that all 
those who could not discharge themselves honourably, and 
had misbehaved themselves in the administration of public 
affairs, should stand to the judgment of Parliament and have 
substituted in their stead men of worth and probity.’’ The 
King, surprised at the confident tone and character of this 
speech, turned for advice to his uncles and brother, the Duke 
of York, and other nobles, who all declared, that they saw 
nought unreasonable in this demand of the commonalty of his 
realms, and a Parliament was, in consequence, appointed to 
meet at Westminster to inquire into the state of the nation. 
In order, however, to avoid this Parliamentary investigation, 
the King, urged by his two designing and unprincipled 
favourites, Robert De Vere, created Duke of Ireland, and 
Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, and Chancellor, removed 
the Court to Bristol. These two minions, unsatisfied with the 
influence they already possessed, and fearful that they would 
not totally engross the Royal ear during the life of the King’s 
uncle, Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, who had deservedly 
obtained the confidence of many of the citizens, entered into 
a conspiracy to assassinate the Duke and other parties of 
eminence attached to his person. To this purpose, they 
hinted the subject to Alderman Exton, then Mayor, suggesting 
the feasibility of the plan, by inviting the Duke and his 
friends to sup at the house of Sir Nicholas Brembre, the late 
Mayor, who had filled the office two successive years,* and 


* A striking instance of the influence which the principal, or as they 
were termed, “ the great companies,” had now obtained in the government 
of the City, appears in their compelling, in 1385, the return for two suc¬ 
cessive years of Sir Nicholas Brembre, Grocer, as Mayor of London, in 
opposition to the whole of the freemen. This curious civic incident is thus 
recorded in the “Chronicle of London.” “Also this yere Sir Nicholl 


140 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


who sided with the conspirators; it being suggested that 
when the wine had circulated freely, the Duke and the whole 
of his company might be readily despatched. This traitorous 
knight, Sir Nicholas, on the success of the plot was to have 
been created Duke of London, but instead of this honorary 
elevation , he was soon afterwards exalted on a gallows at 
Tyburn. Alderman Exton, in silent astonishment, listened 
to the proposal, but revolting at so foul a deed, immediately 
informed the Duke of Gloucester, which led to an open 
rupture between the Court party and the Duke and citizens. 
De Vere was despatched by the King to Wales to raise a 
Welsh army to reduce the Londoners, and his Royal relatives, 
to submission. He soon succeeded in mustering a force of 
15,000 men, at the head of which he marched towards the 
metropolis. The Londoners, however, were not supine; they 
also assembled a considerable army, which, under the guidance 
of the Duke of Gloucester, marched to Oxford, where they 
met the King’s troops, whom they completely routed. This 
perfidious attempt against the lives and liberties of the in¬ 
habitants of London, lost Richard the affections of the citizens, 
and laid the foundation of those commotions which deprived 
him of his sceptre and life; and he acquired too late the fatal 
knowledge, how dangerous to the stability of his throne was 
the open hostility of the citizens of London. 

About 1389, the number of British merchants trading to, 
and residing in the ports of Prussia and other hanse-towns, 
had so greatly augmented, and the ramifications of the com- 


Brembre was chosen Maire agene, be the said craftes and by men of the 
contre at Harowe, and the contre there aboughte, and not be free eleccion 
of the Citee of London, as it ourth to be : and the oolde halle was stuffed 
with men of armes overe even, be ordinaunce and assente of Sir N. Brembre 
for to chose hym Maire on the inorowe: and so he was.” 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


141 


mercial proceedings of London had become so extensive, that 
Richard confirmed the election of John Babys , merchant of 
London, to be governor of all the merchants of England in 
the foreign “lands, places, and dominions specified;” an 
honourable office which was nearly similar to that which bears 
the more modern designation of consul-general. In 1391 a 
dearth occurring, and wheat advancing to 16s. 8 d. per quarter, 
the Mayor, Adam Bamme, and other aldermen, by their 
prompt and charitable conduct, attained a high degree of 
popularity, by subscribing a sum of money and taking from 
the “ Orphans’ Fund” two thousand marks, with which they 
purchased corn abroad; and this seasonable importation 
effectually relieved the wants of the poor.* In 1394 the 
graziers resorting to Smithfield complained to the Privy 
Council of the extortion of the City officers, who, in many 
instances, demanded from them a toll of every third beast they 
brought to market. The Mayor and Sheriffs were sum¬ 
moned to answer the allegations, and a discontinuance of the 
imposition was ordered. 

At the close of the previous and commencement of the 
present reign, we begin to discern a separation of the 
wealthier from the more indigent guilds, or such as sent most 
members to the Common Council and paid the highest fermes ; 
namely, the Merchant Tailors, Vintners, Skinners, Fish¬ 
mongers, Mercers, Grocers, Goldsmiths, Drapers, and such 
others as may be assumed constituted the “thirteen mys- 

* Stow and Fuller eulogize also Sir Stephen Brown, who, during a great 
dearth in his mayoralty in 1438, charitably relieved the wants of the poor 
citizens, by sending ships, at his own expense, to Danzig, which returned 
laden with rye, and which soon depressed grain to reasonable rates. “ He 
is beheld as one of the first merchants who, during a want of corn, showed 
the Londoners the way to the barn-door, prompted by charity, not covetous¬ 
ness, to this adventure.'’ 


142 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


teries,” and which, from the time of Richard the Second, 
we always find alluded to with some epithet implying supe¬ 
riority. Though evidently of less public importance in the 
earlier stages of society than the Weavers, Saddlers, Bakers, 
and the guilds previously alluded to, the fraternities above- 
named, as luxury and commerce advanced, comprised the chief 
mercantile staple and manufacturing interests of the kingdom, 
at the same time that they had enrolled among their body the 
principal citizens. 

Having now arrived at the period in which the companies 
may be said to have become fully established, as the enrol¬ 
ment of their charters was made imperative by Richard the 
Second, we have enumerated the forty-eight “ several mys¬ 
teries ” from which the common-councilmen were first chosen; 
and though the thirteen mysteries were not then specified, yet, 
in all probability, they comprised the present “ twelve great 
companies,” which we have inserted in italics among the 
subjoined list. The order in which they stand denotes their 
rank of precedency in our times; a knotty point of etiquette, 
which led to much animosity and dispute, and remained 
unsettled till the reign of Henry the Eighth. 


Mercers , incorporated 1393, 
Grossers , or Grocers , do. 1345, 
Drapers , do. 1439, 
Fishmongers ,* do. 1536, 
Goldsmiths , do. 1392, 

Skinners , do. 1327, 


Tailors , or Merchant Tailors , 
incorporated 1466, 
Haberdashers , do. 1447, 

Salters , do. 1558, 

Ironmongers , do. 1462, 
Vintners , do. 1437, 


* The dealers in fish consisted originally of salt-fish and stock-fish¬ 
mongers; the former were incorporated in 1433 and the latter in 1509, hut 
the division proving prejudicial to the trade, they were united and incor¬ 
porated in the reign of Henry the Eighth, 1530. 



HISTORY OF LONDON. 143 


Clothworkers , incorp. 1482, 

Ale Brewers, 

Saddlers, 

Hatters, 

Weavers, 

Smiths, 

Tapestry Weavers, 

Horners, 

Leathersellers, 

Masons, 

Founders, 

Leather-dressers, 

Joiners, 

Armorers, 

Chandlers, 

Butchere, 

Fullers, 

Cutlers, 

Curriers, 

Spurriers, 

Freemasons, 

Plummers, 

Brewers, 

Wax Chandlers, 

Fletchers, * 

Barbers, 

Bakers, 

Painters, 

Girdlers, 

Tanners, 

Stainers, 

Pouchmakers, 

Braziers, 

Woodsawyers and Dealers, 

Cappers, 

Pinners. 

Pewterers, 



It may be observed, that from these “twelve companies ” the 
Lord Mayor was for centuries exclusively chosen. None of 
the lists of Lord Mayors, in the ancient histories of London, 
afford a single instance to the contrary, from Fitzalicin to Sir 
Robert Wilmot. Only the wardens of these 66 great companies ” 
were allowed to attend the Lord Mayor as chief-butler at 
coronations. The “twelve” alone (with the single exception 
of the armourers), had the honour of enrolling the Sovereign 
amongst their members, and generally entertaining foreign 
princes and ambassadors: they took precedence in all civic 
triumphs; they occupied the chief standings in all State pro¬ 
cessions through the City; they alone of the companies 
^ • 

* Bovvyers and Fletchers are, respectively, manufacturers of bows and 


arrows. 





144 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


contributed to repair the City walls; and lastly (not to 
mention various other proofs which might be adduced), they 
were the companies who were always the most largely assessed 
in all levies for the Government or the City. The common 
opinion, therefore, that the Lord Mayor must be a member 
of one of these companies, is indisputably founded on pre¬ 
scriptive right and usage. It was in 1742, that Sir Robert 
Wilmot, just mentioned, was sworn Lord Mayor, notwith¬ 
standing that he was not so qualified, and that upon the 
advice of counsel, who said there was no law for it. His 
lordship was of the Coopers’ Company, and would have been 
translated to the Clothworkers’ (which is one of the twelve), 
but his admission being carried only by a small majority, 
and they, at the same time, refusing him their hall, he resolved 
to give them no further trouble. It is now understood, that 
being free of one of the twelve companies is only neces¬ 
sary to qualify the Lord Mayor for President of the Irish 

It is but candid, in conclusion, to remark that, notwith¬ 
standing the ancient rank of the “ twelve companies,” many 
of the others are, on various accounts, of equal or superior 
importance. The Weavers and Saddlers claim precedence as 
to antiquity; the Stationers , besides their growing wealth 
and extensive concerns, rank high as a rich, commercial, 
and working company. The Dyers once took precedence of 
the clothworkers. The Brewers are distinguished for their 
ancient and very curious records; and yield on that point, 
perhaps, only to the Leather sellers, who, at their elegant 
modern hall in St. Helen’s-place, have some matchless 
charters, as regards embellishment, and the most orna¬ 
mentally written “ wardens’ accounts” of any extant. Various 
others might be included in this list as equally worthy of ob¬ 
servation.— Herbert's History of the Twelve Companies. 






Dra.*m by I Salmon.from a. Sketch "by K. Gar Jand 


Engraved by I Woods. 


voew nra ^yiEsmw! n w site k 


A\ B 08 m ^ 


FROM. THE ALTAR 


/■on don*. 


Pulrtish&d by- M/.S'.Orr Sc Cf A men. Corner. 





















































































































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


145 


Having displayed somewhat in detail such important events 
as are connected with the early history of our great metro¬ 
polis, it now becomes necessary to sketch with a more rapid 
pen the successive scenes which may lead to a contem¬ 
poraneous period. London, as she has hitherto been seen, 
stands forth as the mighty heart of a mighty empire; but, her 
pre-eminent greatness, her glory as the first city of the first 
nation of the earth, has yet to be shown. 

Richard the Second, having rendered himself odious to his 
subjects, Henry, Duke of Hereford, son of John of Gaunt, 
late Duke of Lancaster, was invited to ascend the throne of 
England; and the person of the unfortunate monarch having 
been seized, Henry was crowned on the 13th of October, 1399, 
in Westminster Abbey. On the discovery soon afterwards of 
a plot by certain of the nobility to assassinate King Henry, 
Richard was sent from the castle of Leeds, in Kent, to that 
of Pontefract, in Yorkshire, where he was murdered in his 
chamber by Sir Piers Exton, and a gang of assistant 
ruffians. 

Henry the Fourth, on the day of his coronation was at¬ 
tended from the Tower of London to Westminster, bv the 
mayor and aldermen; and the King, to evince his great 
affection towards the citizens, caused all the blank charters 
that had been extorted from them in the late reign to be burnt 
at the standard in Cheapside. Certain statutes of Edward 
the Third, which were deemed rather oppressive, were also 
repealed; an extension of privilege to merchants, relative to 
the package of goods, was granted; and the provision-markets, 
especially those for fish, were subjected to various salutary 
regulations. 

Henry, though crowned, was not yet firmly seated on his 
throne. A little before Christmas, a conspiracy was formed 
by the Abbot of Westminster, in which, besides the Dukes • 

n 


VOL. I. 


146 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of Albemarle, Surrey, and Exeter, the Earls of Gloucester 
and Salisbury, and others, the King’s own son was implicated. 
In crushing this conspiracy, or rather in quelling the rebellion 
to which it gave rise, the citizens of London rendered ex¬ 
cellent service to their Sovereign; and, in return, they were 
favoured in ,the following year (1401) with a new charter, 
which conferred upon the corporation and their successors for 
ever, the custody of Newgate and Ludgate, and of all the 
gates and posterns in the City, with various other privileges. 
In this same year, the prison called the Tun, in Cornhill, was 
converted into a cistern or conduit for Tyburn water: on one 
side of it was erected a cage with a pair of stocks over it for 
the punishment of night-walkers; also a pillory for the ex¬ 
hibition of cheating bakers and thievish millers. 

About the year 1404, the woollen-manufacture was rapidly 
becoming the staple of the country; and a law was passed 
that all woollen cloths made in London should have a leaden 
seal affixed to each piece to distinguish them from those of 
inferior texture, and prevent imposition in the sale. Two 
years afterwards, an English mercantile company, denominated 
“ The Brotherhood of St. Thomas a Beckett,” which had 
been established towards the close of the thirteenth century, 
received a charter of confirmation, under which it long 
flourished. 

The year 1407 is memorable for a dreadful and destructive 
plague which raged in London, and carried off thirty thousand 
of its inhabitants; by which corn became so cheap that wheat 
was sold at three shillings and fourpence the quarter. Six 
years afterwards, it was sold at sixteen shillings the quarter. 

In 1410, two of the King’s sons, the princes Thomas and 
John, were engaged in so serious a tumult in Eastcheap, that 
the Mayor, Sheriffs, and other citizens found it necessary to 
repair to the spot. The case was investigated by commis- 


9 









































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


147 


sioners, and the King was satisfied that the citizens had acted 
with a most laudable spirit. 

It was in March, this year, that John Bradly, or Badly, a 
tailor, and follower of the doctrines of Wicklyffe, was con¬ 
victed before Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, of heresy, 
and burnt to ashes in a cask in Smithfield. Henry, Prince of 
Wales, was present at the execution, and would have saved 
him; but the Prince’s offer was resolutely rejected by the 
determined martyr. 

Amongst other remarkable events of this reign, may be men¬ 
tioned the erection of the Guildhall, by Sir Thomas Knowles, 
Lord Mayor, in 1411; and the rebuilding of a market- 
house, called the Stocks, on the site of the present Mansion 
House. 

Henry the Fifth, soon after his accession to the throne, 
achieved the glorious victory of Agincourt. On Lord Mayor’s 
day, 1415, Nicholas Watton was on his way to Westminster 
to qualify himself for the office of Mayor, when he received 
the news of this event by a King’s messenger. Returning 
from Westminster, accompanied by the Bishop of Winchester, 
the Lord High Chancellor, See., he repaired to St. Paul’s 
cathedral, where Te Deum was sung with great solemnity. 
On the day following, a pompous and solemn procession was 
performed by the Queen, nobility, clergy, mayor, aldermen, 
and the several corporations of the City, on foot, from St. 
Paul’s to Westminster, where the assemblage made a great 
oblation at the shrine of St. Edward, and then returned to the 
City in triumph. On his Majesty’s return from France with 
numbers of the French nobility as his prisoners, he was met 
on Blackheath by the Mayor, Aldermen, and Sheriffs of 
London in their robes, attended by three hundred of the 
principal citizens, mounted on stately horses richly accoutred. 
On that day the City conduits ran with various sorts of wine 


148 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


for the entertainment of the populace; and altogether the 
procession and triumph were of a description never surpassed 
for magnificence in London. The expense of the expedition 
to France, however, had been so enormous, that, in addition 
to the sum granted by Parliament, the King found himself 
obliged to pawn his crown to the Bishop of Winchester for 
twenty thousand marks, and his jewels to the citizens of 
London, for one thousand. 

The reign of Henry the Fifth was a flourishing period for 
the City. A new gate was built leading to the waste in 
Finsbury-manor, since called Moorfields; Holborn was then 
first paved; and lanterns were first hung out for illuminating 
the streets by night, for the convenience and safety of the 
citizens. In 1419, Sir Simon Eyre built Leaden hall at his 
own expense, and gave it to the City to be used as a public 
granary against a time of scarcity. 

The following anecdote forms a curious but rather painful 
illustration of the manners of the period. Inflamed, as it is 
said, by an ancient grudge respecting precedence, the ladies 
Grange and Trussel never met without a quarrel ensuing. 
The church itself was not proof against their violence. Being 
in a pew in the church of St. Dunstan’s-in-the-East, they so 
imperiously vied for superiority, and became so shamefully 
outrageous, that their husbands, the Lord Grange and Mr. 
Trussel, became engaged in the quarrel. To revenge the pre¬ 
sumed indignity offered to each other’s wife, they drew their 
swords; and, refusing to listen to any terms of accom¬ 
modation, they in the affray killed Thomas Petwarden, a 
fishmonger, and wounded several other persons. They were 
both, in consequence, apprehended, and committed to the 
Poultry Compter. Soon afterwards, they were excommu¬ 
nicated by the Archbishop of Canterbury in St. Paul’s 
Church, and by hi$ order, in all the parish churches in 






































































i gel • • 














' 



































•/ -V 

* 

• . 

• • • 5 i . 

• • • ‘ <&■- . .• 

S * f 

. . . 








TII Shepherd, di 
















































































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


149 


London; nor were they absolved till due submission had been 
made both to the church in which the murder was committed, 
and to the widow of Mr. Petwarden. After due inquisition, 
made into the affair, by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord 
Grange and his lady were convicted as the culpable parties. 

A more gracious act was that of Sir Robert Chichley, Lord 
Mayor, who, by his will, appointed that, annually, on his 
birth-day, a sufficient dinner should be given to two thousand 
four hundred poor citizens, with twopence to each in money. 

On the demise of Henry the Fifth (August 31, 1422), his 
son, then only eight months old, was raised to the throne as 
Henry the Sixth, under the protectorship of his uncles, the 
Dukes of Gloucester and Bedford; and, on the 14th of 
November following, he was carried on his mother’s lap, in 
an open chair, through the City in great state, to the Par¬ 
liament of Westminster, where his accession was duly recog¬ 
nized. Thus, at the commencement of his reign, appearances 
were eminently auspicious, until a dangerous quarrel occurred 
between the Duke of Gloucester, Protector, and the turbulent 
Bishop of Winchester, afterwards Cardinal Beaufort, which 
had nearly proved fatal to the City, and involved the whole 
nation in blood. The Protector having received intelligence 
of the bishop’s design to surprise the City of London, while 
the citizens should be engaged in feasting on the Lord 
Mayor’s night (1426), he held a secret conference with 
John de Coventry, the Mayor; and, by the active exertions 
of that officer, the bishop’s faction was, on the following 
morning, repelled in its attempt to force the City, from 
Southwark, and the insurrection was quelled without the 
effusion of blood. However, as it was found impracticable to 
effect a reconciliation between the Protector and the bishop, 
the Duke of Bedford, Regent of France, and brother of the 
protector, came over to England with the view of interposing 


150 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


his good offices. The mayor and aldermen, members of the 
nobility, and many of the more distinguished citizens, met 
him in state at Merton, and conducted him to and through 
the City to Westminster. On the day following, they pre¬ 
sented him with a thousand marks in gold, in two silver- 
gilt basins. 

About this time water conduits were first erected at 
Billingsgate, Paul’s Wharf, and St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, for 
supplying those neighbourhoods with water. In after times 
it became customary, upon great occasions, to inscribe the 
City conduits with moral couplets; such, for instance, as 

“ Life is a drop, a sparkle, a span, 

A bubble : yet how proude is man.” 

In 1426, Sir John Rainwell, then Mayor, having detected 
great malpractices amongst the Lombard merchants, in the 
adulteration of their wines, caused a hundred and fifty butts 
of the commodity to be staved in the kennels. It is said to 
have “ emitted such a very noxious smell, that it infected the 
air to a great degree,” Sir John gave certain lands and 
tenements for the payment of Parliamentary taxes, for the 
relief of the poor in the wards of Aldgate, Bishopsgate, and 
Dowgate. 

The citizens appear to have forgotten the outrages which 
they had experienced at the hands of the proud Bishop of 
Winchester; as, on the return of that prelate from France, 
in the character of cardinal, they met him on his approach 
to London, and conducted him in great state to his palace in 
Southwark. 

Feudal tyranny may be said to have received its death-blow 
in the metropolis in the year 1428. The express law of 
Edward the Confessor, entitling London to the privilege of 
conferring liberty on servants (i. e. slavesJ who should have 
resided for a year and a day in the City unreclaimed by their 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


151 


lords, was solemnly recognized and confirmed, and extended 
to all other cities, walled boroughs, and castles in the realm. 
An odious statute, imposed in the reign of Henry the Fourth, 
enacted, “ That no person whatever, not possessed of land 
to the annual amount of twenty shillings, should be at liberty 
to put out a child or children as apprentice to any trade; and 
the tradesman taking such unqualified person as an apprentice 
to any trade was subjected to a grievous penalty.” This was 
repealed. 

In the same year, the stately palace called Baynard’s Castle 
was destroyed by fire; but it was soon afterwards rebuilt in a 
more magnificent style by “ the good Duke Humphrey of 
Gloucester.” * 

* Castle Baynard, whence the ward or aldermanry in which it was situated 
took its name, was one of the two castles built on the west-end of the City 
with walls and ramparts, as mentioned by Fitzstephen. It received its 
denomination from Ralph Baynard, a follower of William the Conqueror, 
who, at the general survey, possessed many other lordships in England. 
His descendant, Henry Baynard, having taken part with Helias, Earl of 
Mayne, who endeavoured to rob Henry the First of his Norman possessions, 
that Monarch confiscated Baynard’s lordships, and deprived him of his 
barony, which he bestowed on Robert Fitz-Richard, grandson of Gilbert, 
Earl of Clare, who gave to him also the barony of Dunmow, in Essex. (For 
an interesting incident connected with the history of this castle, vide page 
83.) The Fitz-Richard, or Fitz-Walter family continued in high honour 
and reputation till the reign of Henry the Sixth, when the male branch 
having become extinct, Anne, the daughter and heiress, married into the 
RatclifFe family, in which the title of Fitz-Walter was revived. In right of 
the castle, this family held the office of castellan and standard-bearer of the 
City of London. How the castle came into the hands of the Crown, has not 
been ascertained. On the death of Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, by 
whom it was rebuilt after its destruction by fire, it was granted by Henry 
the Sixth to his cousin Richard, Duke of York, who lodged here during the 
convention of the great men of the kingdom, preparatory to the civil wars 
which followed. It was in this castle that Edward, Duke of York, assumed 


152 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


On the 21st of February, 1431, Henry the Sixth, re¬ 
turning from having been crowned at Paris, was met at 
Blackheath by the Mayor and Corporation of London, in a 
grand procession of state, and conducted by them to the City, 
where he was received and entertained in a style of the 
utmost pomp and magnificence. On this occasion, the City 
was decorated with costly silks and carpets; and on the 
bridge and streets through which the. cavalcade passed, were 
seen a variety of gorgeous pageants, with persons representing 
the Loves, Graces, and Sciences. These, by their studied 
orations and minstrelsy, contributed largely to the splendour 
and excitement of the scene. Two days afterwards, the 
Mayor and aldermen attended the young King at West¬ 
minster, and presented him with a golden basket containing 
1,000Z. in nobles. 

At this period, water was conducted from Tyburn to the 
Standard in Cheapside, at the expense of Sir John Wells, the 
late Mayor. 

In 1434, so early as the 24th of November, a great frost 

the title and dignity of King, in 1460. Richard the Third assumed the 
same dignities in Baynard Castle; and there it was that he received his 
minion Buckingham, by whom he was afterwards deserted. The castle was 
substantially repaired by Henry the Seventh, who converted it from a 
fortress to a palace; frequently resided within its walls, and hence made 
several of his solemn progresses. At a subsequent period it was the re¬ 
sidence of Sir William Sydney, chamberlain and steward to Edward the 
Sixth. Here the “bloody Queen Mary” maintained her right to the 
Crown of England, and hence her partizans issued to proclaim her title. 
The castle was at that time the residence and property of William Herbert, 
Earl of Pembroke, a particular favourite of Mary’s. Queen Elizabeth did 
that Earl the honour to sup with him; after which she went upon the water 
to show herself to the people. The last inhabitants of the castle were the 
Earls of Shrewsbury and their families, who resided in it till it again became 
a prey to the flames in the conflagration of 1666. 


HISTORY OF LONDON, 


153 


set in, and continued till the 10th of February following, 
whereby the Thames was so intensely frozen, that all sorts 
of merchandize and provisions brought into the mouth of the 
river were unladen and brought by land to the City. The 
preceding autumn had been remarkably wet; and, in con¬ 
sequence, the corn was greatly damaged, a dearth ensued, and 
wheat was sold at the excessive rate of 1 7 . 65. 8d. per quarter, 
hour years afterwards, the harvest again suffered so much 
by storms of wind and rain, that wheat once more, in London, 
reached the same enormous price; and in many parts of the 
country the poor were reduced to the necessity of making 
bread from fern-roots and ivy-berries. Speedy relief, how¬ 
ever, was obtained by the exertions of Stephen Brown, the 
Mayor, in sending ships to Prussia for a supply of rye. 

Philip, Duke of Burgundy, having perfidiously broken 
his alliance with the English, many of his unoffending 
subjects w r ere, in 1435, murdered by the Londoners. In 
the following year, favouring his new ally, the French King, 
he commenced the siege of Calais; when the citizens of 
London distinguished themselves not only by getting ready 
their quota of troops within the time prescribed, but also 
by maintaining them at their own expense. On the arrival 
of the English force in the neighbourhood of Calais, the 
Burgundians, intimidated, raised the siege, and precipitately 
fled. 

Philip Malpas, one of the sheriffs in 1440, proved a muni¬ 
ficent benefactor to the City. Fie left, by his will. 1257. for 
the relief of poor prisoners; and every year, for five years, 
400 shirts and shifts, 40 pairs of sheets, and 150 gowns of 
frieze to the poor. To 500 poor people in London 65. 8 d. 
each; to poor maids in marriage 100 marks; to the repair 
of highways 100 marks; 20 marks a-year for a graduate to 
preach; and 207. to preachers at the Spital on the three 

x 


VOL. 1. 


154 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Easter holydays. In these charities, which were truly great 
at the time, he was imitated hy Robert Large, Mayor in the 
same year, who gave 200/. to his parish church of St. Olave’s, 
in Surrey; 25/. to St. Margaret’s, Lothbury; 20/. to the 
poor; 100 marks to the bridge; 200 marks towards the 
vaulting over the water-course of Wallbrook ; to poor 
maids in marriage, 100 marks; to poor householders, 100 
marks, &c. 

The ignorance and superstitious feeling of the times are 
shown by the following incident. In 1440, Sir Richard Wick, - 
Vicar of Hermetsworth, in Essex, was burnt on Tower-hill 
for his repute^ heretical opinions. Regarded by the people 
as a pious and holy man, the vicar of Barking Church, 
in that neighbourhood, a fraudulent and covetous priest, 
embraced the opportunity to impose upon the credulous 
multitude. Mixing ashes with the powder of aromatic spices, 
he secretly strewed them over the place where the martyr had 
been sacrificed, and then industriously reported the pretended 
miracle of the fragrancy of the dust. This immediately 
produced the effect required; the people in crowds hurried 
from all parts to the place of execution; and, finding the scent 
of the ashes in accordance with the report, they tumultuously 
arraigned the justice of the judges, for condemning a holy 
man. By the address and management of the crafty priest, 
the people were inadvertently led into idolatry; great 
numbers resorted to the spot, invoked the departed as a 
saint, and profusely offered at his shrine large sums of money, 
waxen images, &c. This farcical proceeding was kept up 
for about a week, to the no small profit of the priest, when, 
by an order from the Government, the Mayor and aldermen 
apprehended the author of the fraud, and many of his dupes, 
and committed them to prison. 

In 1441, the beautiful cross which had been erected at 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


155 


the western end of Cheapside, or, as it was then called, West- 
cheap, by King Edward the First, in pious and affectionate 
remembrance of his beloved Queen Eleanor, in the year 1290, 
having fallen into decay, John Hatherly, the Mayor, applied 
to the King for permission “ to re-edify the same in a more 
beautiful manner, by way of ornament to the City.” Upon 
the exact site of this cross (demolished in 1581), a standard 
for the protection of the public in crossing the end of Cheap- 
side has recently been erected. The first stone was laid on 
the 28th of May, 1838, by Mr. Westwood, the deputy of the 
north-side of the Ward of Farringdon Within. It is a plain 
shaft of granite, slender and tasteless in form, and too small 
for the area of which it forms the centre. # In digging for its 
foundation some antique remains were discovered. 

Margaret, daughter of Rayner, Duke of Anjou, and titular 
King of Sicily, Naples, and Jerusalem, newly espoused to 
King Henry, was, on her way to London, in 1445, met at 
Blackheath by the Mayor, corporation, and chief citizens, 
and conducted into the City with a degree of pomp and 
splendour almost equal to that with which her royal husband 
had been received on his return from having been crowned at 
Paris. Some time afterwards the King made the Queen a 
present of ten pounds per annum out of the profits arising 
from the ripa regince , or Queen Hithe, in Thames-street. 

The union of Henry with Margaret of Anjou was far from 
proving a happy event for the country. The imbecility of 
the King soon became notorious; the Queen and her minions 


* The following inscription, placed in a glass vessel, was laid under the 
basement-stone :—“ Farringdon Ward Within, North side. The first stone 
of this standard, erected by the Honourable the Commissioners of Sewers 
and Pavements, for the protection of the public, was laid on Monday, the 
28th day of May, 1838, by Robert Westwood, Deputy. The Right Wor¬ 
shipful Thomas Kelly, Esq., Alderman.” 


156 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


usurped all power and authority; unusual discontent and 
tumult prevailed. Margaret, with Cardinal Beaufort, and the 
Dukes of Somerset, Suffolk, and Buckingham, had succeeded 
in accomplishing the ruin and death of that worthy and 
patriotic nobleman, the Duke of Gloucester. In revenge, 
the people of Kent had seized and beheaded the Queen’s 
favourite, the Duke of Suffolk. Margaret’s rage became 
boundless, and led the way to an insurrection so formidable 
as to shake the kingdom to its very centre. The Duke of 
York regarded this as a favourable time for making an effort 
to obtain the Crown. Having sounded the inclinations of 
the people, he found a suitable tool in the person of Jack 
Cade, a ruffianly Irishman, who, for his crimes, had been 
compelled to flee from his country. Nor from his own country 
alone; for, in the preceding year he had murdered a woman 
in a state of pregnancy, in England. For this offence he 
took sanctuary in a church, but having, through the interest 
of friends, obtained leave to transport himself, he went over 
to France. His restless spirit, however, induced a speedy 
return to this country, when he became known to the Duke 
of York. He is said to have borne a strong personal re¬ 
semblance to John Mortimer, a prince of the blood, of the 
family of March, who was beheaded in the early part of the 
reign. Assuming to be Mortimer himself, Jack Cade went 
into Kent, where, under the pretext of reforming abuses in 
the Government, and of liberating the people from • all 
taxation, he soon found himself at the head of an extensive 
rabblement force, with which he marched back towards 
London. At Blackheath he formed an encampment for a 
month, and established a regular communication with certain 
disaffected parties in the City. Horses, arms, and money, 
and a daily accession of force were thus obtained. The King 
marched against him with an army of fifteen thousand men* 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


157 


The Royal force was led into ambush in the neighbourhood 
of Seven Oaks, and utterly defeated with great loss. Flushed 
with success, Cade again set out for London. At Blackheath 
he was met by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Duke 
of Buckingham, who, in the King’s name, demanded his 
surrender. This he refused, unless Henry would come to 
him in person and grant all his demands. On the receipt of 
this intelligence, the King and Queen retired to Kenilworth 
Castle, leaving no troops in London but those in garrison at 
the Tower. Cade, upon advice of the King’s flight, marched 
for London, and fixed his head-quarters in the White Hart 
Inn, Southwark. All was confusion in the City. Most of 
the members of the Lord Mayor’s council, summoned upon 
the emergency, were, for the immediate admission of Cade; 
but Robert Horne, alderman and fishmonger, strenuously 
opposed his reception. So enraged were the rebels at this 
opposition, that to pacify them the Mayor was not only 
obliged to send Horne to Newgate, but to open the City- 
gates and admit them. Cade immediately issued a pro¬ 
clamation strictly commanding all his followers not to molest 
or offer violence to the citizens, nor extort anything from 
them without payment, upon pain of death. In his march 
through Cannon-street, he struck London-stone with his 
sword, exclaiming, “ Now is Mortimer Lord of this City.” 
He returned at night to his quarters in Southwark. Next 
day he caused the Lord Saye, High Treasurer of England, 
to be apprehended and arraigned before the Lord Mayor and 
Judges at Guildhall. On his refusal to plead, and insisting 
upon his right of peerage, Cade caused him to be taken from 
the bar, and instantly led to the standard in Cheapside. 
There, without allowing him time for confession, he had him 
beheaded: his head, fixed upon a spear, was carried before 
the rebels in triumph, and his body, at a horse’s tail, was 


inSTOIIY OV LONDON. 


158 

drawn through the City, hanged upon a gibbet, and after¬ 
wards quartered. Sir James Cromer, the late Chancellor’s 
son-in-law, and sheriff of the county of Kent, was subjected 
to a similar fate at Mile-end. His head, placed on a pole, 
was, with that of Lord Saye, carried before Cade through the 
principal streets of the City, the sanguinary rebel making 
them, in mockery, kiss each other in every street. Cade, 
with the view of enriching himself, now plundered many of 
the chief merchants of the City. The wives and daughters 
of the citizens were also exposed to the brutal assaults of his 
rabble. These evils speedily wrought their own cure. Cade 
having marched into Southwark for the night, it was unani¬ 
mously resolved to shut the gates and oppose his return. 
Attempting to force his passage over the bridge, a desperate 
battle, with great loss of life on both sides, ensued. In 
defence of the drawbridge, Sir Matthew Gough, Lieutenant 
of the Tower, Alderman Sutton, and many of the brave 
citizens, were either killed or drowned. Greatly discouraged 
and weakened by his loss, Cade was obliged to recruit his 
army with the prisoners of the King’s Bench and Marshalsea. 
With the view of prevailing upon the people to return to their 
respective homes, a general pardon was now offered. This 
produced so sudden and wonderful an effect, that before 
daylight Cade was deserted by most of his followers and 
left to shift for himself. Not daring to wait for the succours 
promised by the partisans of the Duke of York, he fled in 
disguise into the woody part of Sussex. A proclamation was 
issued by Government offering a reward of one thousand 
marks for his capture dead or alive. Cade was discovered 
lurking in a garden at Hothfield, by Alexander Eden, or 
Iden, a Kentish gentleman, who, in his attempt to seize him, 
killed him in fight. He then put his corpse into a cart and 
conveyed it to London, where he received the proffered 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 159 

reward, rims, through the bravery and gallant deportment 
of the citizens of London, a dangerous rebellion was sup¬ 
pressed with slight comparative loss. In consideration of 
the service performed by the citizens on this trying occasion, 
Sir Godfrey Fielding, the Mayor, was, in 1452, appointed one 
of his Majesty’s Privy Councillors. 

In 1454, John Norman, having been chosen Mayor, changed 
the custom of riding to Westminster on the day of inaugu¬ 
ration to that of proceeding thither by water. His example 
of building a stately barge at his own expense was followed 
by the several companies of the City, and the barges, all 
splendidly adorned and majestically floating on the stream, 
formed a striking aquatic spectacle. The watermen, to whom 
the change proved highly advantageous, were so delighted 
that they framed a song in praise of the new Mayor, com¬ 
mencing with the words, “ Row thy boat, Norman, row to thy 
leman.” The Lord Mayor’s procession by water has con¬ 
tinued to the present time. Through the influence of the 
bishops and clergy, numerous public schools were, in the 
course of the reign of Henry the Sixth, established in different 
parts of London. The alleged object of this was <£ to check 
and suppress other smaller schools set up by illiterate men, 
who did the youth more harm than good.” 

The contests which had long subsisted between the clergy 
and laity, arising out of the power given to the curates of 
the City to levy certain offerings or rates, were finally and 
amicably adjusted in the year 1453. 

From the defective state of the City police at this period, 
tumults were almost incessantly occurring in the streets. On 
one occasion, in a broil between the students of the Inns of 
Court and the inhabitants of Fleet-street, the Queen’s at¬ 
torney was killed; and, in consequence, the principals of 
Furnival’s, Clifford’s, and Barnard’s-inns were committed 


1 (30 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


prisoners to Hertford Castle, and Alderman Taylor and 
others were committed to the Castle of Windsor. 

After a long succession of civil disturbances in various 
parts of the kingdom, the imbecile Henry was deposed; the 
Earl of March, the eldest son of the Duke of York, was 
unanimously chosen King in his stead, under the title of 
Edward the Fourth; and on the 5th of March, 1461, he was 
proclaimed at the usual places in the City. On the same day, 
the new Sovereign dined at Baynard’s Castle, and continued 
there till his army was ready to march in pursuit of his pre¬ 
decessor, who had fled into the north and assembled an army 
of sixty thousand men. How lightly human life is held by 
the rulers of semi-civilized states, may be estimated by the 
seriously-related story, that during King Edward the Fourth’s 
stay at Baynard’s Castle, “ he caused Walter Walker, an 
eminent grocer in Cheapside, to be apprehended and tried for 
a few harmless words innocently spoken by him, viz., that he 
would make his son heir to the Crown, inoffensively meaning 
his own house, which had the Crown for its sign, for which 
sanguinary crime he was beheaded in Smithfield on the eighth 
day of his reign.” A few months afterwards, a servant of the 
King’s household had one of his hands cut off at the Standard 
in Cheapside for striking a man within the Palace at West¬ 
minster. 

In the second year of his reign, King Edward, to evince his 
gratitude to the citizens of London for the many great and 
signal services done to him, granted them a new charter, 
confirming all their former liberties and free customs, and 
investing them with many important additional privileges. 

In 1463, the Lord Mayor distinguished himself by insist¬ 
ing upon his right of precedency in the City. On a call of 
new Sergeants-at-Law, an entertainment was given by them 
at Ely House, Holborn, to which the Mayor and Corporation 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


1GI 


were invited. Upon their entrance it was perceived that 
Baron Ruthen, the Lord High Treasurer, had assumed the 
seat of honour at table. The Lord Mayor insisted that at all 
times and upon all occasions he, as the King’s representative, 
and in honour of his principal and Sovereign, was entitled to 
the pre-eminence, or most honourable place of all subjects of 
what denomination soever, within the City and liberties thereof. 
Lord Ruthen, however, refused to surrender his seat, and the 
Mayor and citizens, in consequence, withdrew from the hall 
and returned to the City. There they were sumptuously 
entertained by the chief magistrate. 

On the night before the coronation of Queen Elizabeth, 
in 1465, Thomas Cook, the then Lord Mayor, had the honour 
of being installed a Knight of the Bath in the Tower of 
London. Shortly after the expiration of his mayoralty, Sir 
Thomas Cook, with others, was impeached of the crime of 
high treason. He was, in the first instance, admitted to bail, 
but afterwards he was arrested, committed to the Tower, his 
goods seized, and his wife consigned to the custody of the 
new Mayor. Upon his trial at Guildhall, Sir Thomas was 
honourably acquitted; but, through the cupidity of his pro¬ 
secutors, he was detained a close prisoner till he had purchased 
his liberty at the exorbitant price of eight thousand pounds 
to the King, eight hundred marks to the Queen, and the 
sacrifice of immense property embezzled by the servants of 
his enemies, who had obtained possession of all his estates. 

About this time, an alderman, for offensive language to the 
Mayor, and for his obstinacy in refusing to remove the 
noisome carcass of a dog from before his door, was fined by 
the Court of Aldermen in the sum of fifty pounds. 

An amusing illustration of the manners of the period 
(1468), presents itself in the mode of punishment inflicted 
on some of the London jury who had been found guilty of 


VOL. i. 


Y 


162 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


receiving bribes. They were sentenced to ride from Newgate 
to Cornhill with paper mitres upon their heads; having been 
some time exposed, they returned in the same manner. 

The Earl of Warwick having succeeded in effecting the 
release of King Henry from the Tower of London, where he 
had endured a confinement of more than six years, Henry 
was restored to the Crown, and Edward was declared a 
usurper, and with his brother, the Duke of Gloucester, 
attainted by Parliament in the winter of 1471. At that 
period the Parliament sat at St. Paul’s. Violent proceedings 
were so much dreaded by the Lord Mayor, John Stockton, 
that to avoid participating in them he feigned illness, and Sir 
Thomas Cook (admitted to his seat and restored to his 
estates), sat for a considerable time as his locum tenens. 
The sanguinary conflicts which ensued were at length ter¬ 
minated by the death of the unfortunate Henry, and the 
consequent undisputed possession of the throne by Edward 
the Fourth. 

In 1472, there being only one pair of stocks in London, 
the Mayor caused stocks to be erected in every ward for 
the more effectual punishment of vagrants; and in the fol¬ 
lowing year he endeavoured to clear the City and liberties of 
disorderly women by means of corporal punishment and 
indecent exposure. 

» It is due to the memory of William Caxton, citizen and 
mercer, and to the noble and invaluable art of typography, 
to place his name upon record as the first English printer. 
Caxton, a native of Kent, was born in the year 1410. Having 
served his time as a mercer, he went abroad as agent to the 
Mercers’ Company, and afterwards was taken into the suite 
of Margaret of York, wife of the Duke of Burgundy. Whilst 
residing in Flanders, he acquired a knowledge of the art of 
printing, and translated and printed in that country the 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


163 


ii Recuyell of the History of Troy.” Returning to England 
in 1472, he brought with him this and other printed books 
as specimens of his skill, and in the year following, under 
the patronage of Thomas Milling, Abbot of Westminster, he 
established a press in the Almonry, where he produced, in 
1474, a little book translated from the French, called the 
Game at Chess. This is the first book ever printed in 
England. 

Indefatigable in application, Caxton printed and published 
about fifty works, some of them large volumes, and many of 
them his own productions. He died in 1491. 

From the autumn of 1475 to the winter of 1476, a pesti¬ 
lence raged in London by which an incredible number of 
people died. During the prevalence of this calamity, Sir 
Bartholomew James, the Mayor, while at his devotion in St. 
Paul’s church, imagined himself to be insulted by Robert 
Byfield, one of the sheriffs. His Lordship complained to the 
Court of Aldermen, by which Court the sheriff wns sub¬ 
jected to the fine of fifty pounds, to be appropriated towards 
the repair of the City conduits. In 1480, the Lord Mayor 
and Court of Aldermen fined a person named Robert Deynis 
twenty pounds, for presuming to marry an orphan in the City 
without their license. 

King Edward, in 1481, obtained a loan of five thousand 
marks from the City; in return for which he, in the following 
year, gave the Mayor and Corporation a grand hunting- 
match in Waltham Forest. Amongst other things, he also 
sent two hares, six bucks, and a tun of wine for the entertain¬ 
ment of the Lady Mayoress and the wives of the aldermen 
and chief citizens. 

The death of Edward the Fourth (1483)—the assumption 
of the Protectorate by Richard, Duke of Gloucester—his 
usurpation of the Crown, and alleged murder of the young 


164 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


King, Edward the Fifth, and his brother, in the Tower—and 
his death on Bosworth-field—are matter of general rather 
than of local history, unless it were upon a more extended 
scale than the present. 

Henry, Earl of Richmond, proclaimed King by his vic¬ 
torious army on the 22d of August, 1485, was met at High- 
gate five days afterwards, by the Lord Mayor and aldermen 
in state, and conducted into the City. It was about the 11th 
of October following that that dreadful distemper deno¬ 
minated the sweating sickness, first began to rage in London. 
Amongst the incredible numbers who were rapidly carried off 
by this terrific scourge were the new Mayor, Thomas Hyde, 
and his immediate successor Sir William Stokker, and one of 
the sheriffs; so that, in this year, the City had three mayors 
and three sheriffs. So strict were the citizens at this period, 
to exclude all foreign interest, that, in the mayoralty of 
Nicholas Exton (1456) it was renewed and confirmed, by a 
clause in the oath prescribed to every freeman at the time he 
was made free, that he should “ take none apprentice, but if 
he be free-born, that is to say, no bondman’s son, nor the son 
of any alien.” Two years afterwards, very salutary regula¬ 
tions were passed (and it would be well could they be re¬ 
newed) prohibiting, under penalties, the slaughter of cattle 
within the walls of the City. 

Henry the Seventh, who, throughout his reign, extorted 
large sums from the City, in the form of loans, benevolences, 
&c., gave a grand Christmas banquet to the Mayor and Cor¬ 
poration, at Westminster, in 1493. On this occasion, he 
conferred the honour of knighthood on Ralph Austry, the 
Mayor. 

In 1498, many beautiful gardens at Finsbury were con¬ 
verted into a spacious field for the use of the London archers, 
or, trained-bands. Portions of this site are now occupied by 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


165 


what is termed the Artillery-ground, and by an extensive 
burial-place for Dissenters. 

The prices of provisions, at successive periods, are not 
without interest. In the year of the sweating sickness, such 
was the dearth that wheat was sold at 24 s, the quarter; in 
1493, it had fallen to 4s., and pickled herrings might be 
purchased at 3s. 4 d. per barrel; in 1499, wheat was at the 
same low price, wine was sold at 10s. per hogshead, and 
bay-salt at 4 cl. per bushel. The consumption of the City 
must have been soon afterwards reduced; as, in 1500, from 
20,000 to 30,000 of its inhabitants were carried otf by the 
plague. 

Amongst the improvements of the metropolis, in the reign 
of Henry the Seventh, it may be mentioned that, in 1502, 
Fleet-ditch, the remains of the old river of Wells, was scoured 
down to the Thames; so that it was rendered navigable for 
large boats, laden with fuel, fish, &c., up to Old-bourne, or 
Holborn-bridge. Excepting as a common-sewer, all traces of 
this 44 old river ” are now extinct. About the same time, 
Houndsditch, which, till then, had been a noisome receptacle 
of carrion and all sorts of filth, was filled up and paved over. # 

* Edric, the Saxon thane, who assassinated his Sovereign Edmund Iron¬ 
side, after losing him a battle by treachery, was drawn by the heels from 
Baynard’s Castle through the City, and thrown into Houndsditch, by 
command of King Canute, after he had been tormented to death by burning 
torches.— Brayley’s Londiniana, vol. iv., p. 35. From time immemorial, 
Houndsditch appears to have been inhabited by much the same class of 
people as at present; Jews, pawnbrokers, usurers, dealers in old clothes, 
&c. Stow observes that, “ towards the street, were some small cottages, of 
two stories high, and little garden-plots backward, for poor bedrid people, 
for in that street dwelt none other, budded by some prior of the Holy 
Trinity, to whom that ground belonged.” Anthony Munday, in his addi¬ 
tions to Stow, speaks of the “ unconscionable broking usurers, a base kind 
of vermin,” who had crept into Houndsditch, and were both the “discredit 
of the age, and of the place where they are suffered to live.” 


1GG 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Although London, in common with every other part of 
the kingdom, suffered lamentably from extortion during the 
tyrannical reign of Henry the Eighth, many important im¬ 
provements were effected. Not only did the City indulge 
itself in all the pageantry of splendid and expensive spectacles, 
according to the taste of the age, but due attention was paid 
to the arts and sciences, and to the general comforts and 
elegances of life. Henry’s first public act, that of committing 
Empson and Dudley, the tools of his predecessor, for illicitly 
furnishing his coffers, to the Tower of London, was eminently 
calculated to induce popularity. These wholesale plunderers 
of the people were afterwards condemned and attainted by 
Parliament, and beheaded upon Tower-hill. Two days after 
the King’s accession, all beggars, not belonging to the City, 
were banished, and compelled to seek relief from their re¬ 
spective parishes. On St. John’s eve, 1510, Henry, in the 
habit and arms of one of the yeomen of his guard, came into 
the City to witness the setting of the City-watch; one of the 
most interesting and magnificent processions of those times, 
and, excepting that it was at night, not slightly resembling 
the festival of Corpus Christi as celebrated in all Roman 
Catholic towns of the Continent. So delighted was he with 
the spectacle, that, on the St. Peter’s night following, accom¬ 
panied by his Royal consort, and attended by the principal 
nobility, he returned to the City, and in Cheapside was again 
a spectator of the show. 

Sir William Fitz-William was, in 1510, disfranchised 
because he refused to serve the office of sheriff. On the fall 
of Cardinal Wolsey, his former master, this gentleman gave 
him kind entertainment at his country-house. The King 
demanded how he durst entertain so great an enemy to the 
State. His answer was, that he had not contemptuously nor 
wilfully done it, but because he had been his master, and 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


167 


partly the maker of his fortune. Pleased with his answer, 
the King said he had himself too few such servants: he 
immediately knighted him, and afterwards made him a Privy 
Councillor. Sir William, at his death, left many large sums 
lor charitable purposes; and to the King he bequeathed his 
great ship with all her tackles and his collar of the Garter, 
with his best George set with diamonds. He was Knight of 
the Order of the Garter, Lord-Keeper of the King’s Privy 
Seal, and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. 

Roger Achilly rendered his mayoralty, in 1511, remarkable 
by storing Leadenhall, the City-granary, with every sort of 
grain. He also caused Moorfields to be levelled, and the 
passage to the adjoining villages rendered more commodious, 
by raising causeways, and building bridges as might be 
required. In the following year, the sheriffs of London and 
Middlesex were, for the first time, empowered by Parliament 
to empannel jurors for the City courts. In 1514, a tumultuous 
mob from the City broke down all the fences in the neigh¬ 
bourhood of Islington, Hoxton, and Shoreditch, on pretence 
that their inhabitants had debarred them from their usual 
exercises in the fields; and also that when any of them at¬ 
tempted to divert themselves with shooting, their bows and 
arrows were seized, and destroyed before their eyes, and they 
themselves were indicted for trespasses. The King’s Com¬ 
missioners severely reprimanded the Mayor and aldermen 
for neglect of duty on this occasion. 

In 1517, a new tribunal was established by the Common 
Council under the denomination of the Court of Conscience. 
The act of the Council appointed 44 that the Lord Mayor 
and aldermen for the time being shall monthly assign and 
appoint two aldermen and four discreet commoners to sit at 
Guildhall, in a judicial manner, twice a-week, viz., on Wed- 


1G8 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


nesdays and Saturdays; there to hear and determine all 
matters brought before them between party and party (being 
citizens and freemen of London), in all cases where the due 
debt or damage does not exceed forty shillings.” This act 
was passed as an experiment for two years; but its effects 
were found so beneficial that it was afterwards extended from 
time to time, and at length rendered perpetual by Parlia¬ 
mentary authority in the first year of James the First. 

The May-day of 1515, was rendered memorable in the City 
of London by a serious tumult, which broke out chiefly, in 
the first instance, amongst the artificers and apprentices, 
against strangers who were permitted to send their wares and 
to exercise handicrafts in the City, “ to the great hindrance 
and impoverishing of the King’s liege people.” Many lives 
were lost in the affray, and the day was ever afterwards dis¬ 
tinguished as “ Evil May-day.” Mayings and May-games, 
with the ceremony of setting up a May-pole in Leadenhall- 
street, were less frequently celebrated after this insurrection. 
It was about this time that London was again grievously 
afflicted with the sweating sickness, which, as it was peculiar 
to England and to Englishmen, in foreign parts was termed 
Sudor Anglicus, or the English sweat. In 1521, another 
infectious distemper raged in the City and swept off numbers 
of the population. 

Henry, in the tenth year of his reign, granted the citizens 
of London a charter for removing the sessions of the peace 
from St. Martin’s-le-Grand to Guildhall. He also granted a 
charter of incorporation to the physicians. In the same year, 
the common ditch between Aldgate and the Postern next the 
Tower-ditch, was cleansed at an expense of 95/. 3s. Ad. The 
payments indicate the cost of labour at this period: the chief 
ditcher sevenpence per diem; the second ditcher sixpence; 




























































































































































































































. ■ 



























1 '■ . •• 

-i 
















































- • . " . 

... • 

. • • : 


. . 

. 


t ■' 

•• 

. . . .<* • 
























































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


169 


the other ditchers fivepence; and labourers, or vagabonds as 
they were then termed, one penny per diem each, and meat 
and drink at the City’s charge. 

In 1531, one of the greatest entertainments recorded in the 
annals of London was given in the Bishop of Ely’s palace in 
Holborn, for five days in succession. The occasion was that 
of eleven gentlemen of the law being promoted to the dignity 
of the coif. There were present at this feast, the King, 
Queen, Foreign Ministers, Lord Mayor, Judges, Master of 
the Rolls, Aldermen of the City, Masters of Chancery, 
Sergeants-at-Law, principal Merchants of London, many 
knights and esquires, and a certain number of citizens, 
members of the chief companies. Making due allowance for 
the difference between the value of money then and at the 
present period, and also for the difference between the size and 
weight of cattle then and now, the reader may be enabled, 
from the subjoined list (which is only part of the bill of fare), 
to form some estimate of the nature, cost, and extent of this 
entertainment. 

f. s» d* 


Twenty-four large oxen, each at .... 1 6 8 

The carcass of a large ox.14 0 

One hundred sheep, each at.0 2 10 

Fifty-one calves, each at.0 4 8 

Thirty-four hogs, each at.0 3 8 

Ninety-one pigs, each at.0 0 6 

Ten dozen capons of Greece, each dozen at. 0 1 8 

Nine dozen and a half of Kentish capons, 

each at.0 10 

Nineteen dozen of common capons, each at . 0 0 6 

Seven dozen and nine of grouse or heath- 

cocks, each at.0 0 8 

VOL. i. z 









170 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


S. 


d. 


3 


01 

"2 


0 
0 

0 2 
0 10 

0 5 


Fourteen dozen and eight common cocks, 

each at.0 

The best pullets, at.0 

Common ditto, at.0 

Thirty-seven dozen of pigeons, each dozen at 0 
Three hundred and forty dozen of larks, 

each dozen at.0 

This subject demands a little further illustration. It is 
stated, upon the authority of Anderson’s “ History of Com¬ 
merce,” that, at the period above referred to, the number of 
butchers, in London and the suburbs, did not exceed eighty. 
Upon an average, each butcher killed nine oxen per week; 
which, multiplied by forty-six (the number of weeks in a 
year during which meat was eaten, none being consumed 
during Lent) gives 33,120 as the total annual consumption 
of oxen in London. In round numbers the carcasses at 
present consumed in a year are about— 

Oxen, 110,000 Calves, 50,000 

Sheep, 770,000 Swine, 250,000 

Lambs, 250,000 

This constitutes an average amount of 1,738,303 cwt., and 
produces a sum of 10,000,000/. to the agriculturist.* In 


* It must be remembered also, that a large quantity of meat arrives in 
London ready slaughtered, not only in steam-vessels from Scotland and 
Ireland, but in carts from the provinces. This quantity is increasing, and 
may, perhaps, be estimated at one-eighth of the whole consumption. A 
further increase will result from the completion of the different railroads 
now in progress. 

In addition to meat must be taken into account poultry, fish, bread, 
butter, cheese, eggs, milk, vegetables, &c. The first of these is estimated to 
amount annually, in value, to 85,000/.; to which must be added, game, 







HISTORY OF LONDON. 


171 


addition to the vast increase of numbers must be taken into 
consideration the immense increase of weight in all cattle, 
which has been more than doubled, even within the last 
century and a-lialf. About the year 1700, the average weight 
of the oxen sold in the London market was 370lbs.; of 
calves, 50lbs.; of sheep, 28lbs.; and of lambs, 18lbs.: the 
present average weight is, of oxen, 800lbs.; of calves, 140lbs.; 
of sheep, 80lbs.; and of lambs, 50lbs. 

The philosophic mind will be yet more deeply impressed 


pigeons, rabbits, &c., amounting to as much in price, though the supply 
is less in quantity than the product of the farm-yard. 

London is supplied with fish chiefly from the two wholesale markets of 
Billingsgate and Hungerford. From Billingsgate, by far the larger of the 
two, the following has been recently given as the division of 120,000 tons 
of fish in a single year :— 


Fresh salmon 

• • • 

45,446 

Haddock .... 

90,604 

Turbot . . 

• • • 

87,558 

Mackarel .... 

482,492 

Cod . . . 


444,138 

Lobster .... 

3,076,700 

Herring 

. 

3,366,400 

Whiting .... 

1,954,600 

Maid, Plaice, 

Skate, 


Eel (cwt.) .... 

1,500 

Sprat, and 
(bushels) 

Sole 

• • 

115,215 

Crab. 

500,000 


With bread and flour, it requires about 1,000,000 quarters of wheat per 
annum to supply the metropolis. Of butter, the annual consumption is 
estimated at 21,000,000 lbs., of cheese, 26,000,000 lbs. With milk, the 
town is supplied by upwards of 10,000 cows, supposed to yield a daily 
average of nine quarts each, making a total of 8,212,500 gallons annually ; 
producing to the wholesale dealers a sum of 400,000/.; on which the retail 
dealers are considered to lay a profit of cent, per cent., exclusively of what 
they realise by the addition of water ad libitum. Of eggs, including those 
from France, Holland, Ireland, Scotland, &c., in addition to the produce of 
our own country, the consumption is incredible. The fruit and vegetables, 
brought to the London markets, from the gardens in the vicinity of the 
metropolis (exclusively of the produce of Kent, Surrey, and the more 
distant counties), are thought to amount in annual value to upwards of 
1,000,000/. sterling. 








17*2 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


with a sense of the growing greatness of the metropolis, when 
it is brought to view, that London, formerly contained within 
a circumference of two miles, now occupies a surface of 
eighteen square miles, within a supposed circumference of 
thirty miles. Taken in its largest extent, London is under¬ 
stood to contain from 10,000 to 1*2,000 streets, squares, lanes, 
courts, &c.; 156,000 houses and public edifices; and from 
1,500,000 to 2,000,000 of people. 

In 1543, 44 by reason of a great mortality among the 
cattle, occasioned by great rains in the preceding season, 
meat rose to such an excessive price, that mutton was sold at 
25 . 4 d. the quarter, and a lamb at 35. 4 d” In consequence, 
the Lord Mayor and Council made a sumptuary law for 
preventing luxurious eating. # By this law it was, amongst 
other things, enacted that, 44 neither the Mayor, aldermen, 
nor sheriffs, should buy any cranes, swans, or bustards, upon 
penalty for every fowl so bought, of the sum of 205.” About 
the same time, coal, bought at Newcastle for 2 s. 2d. per 
chaldron, was sold in the City at 45. 

King Henry, in the year 1532, and again in 1539, caused 
a general muster of the citizens, from the age of sixteen to 
that of sixty, to the extent of 15,000 men, to be made at 
Mile-end; with an account of the weapons, armour, and other 
military accoutrements belonging to the City. In the first 
instance, the citizens assembled early in the morning: before 
nine, they commenced their march through the City to West¬ 
minster; went round St. James’s-park; passed downHolborn, 
and thence to Leadenhall, where they separated at five 
o’clock. This procession, which occupied more than eight 
hours, appears to have been of a very imposing character. 

Still more splendid, however, was the pageant by which, 
in 1533, Queen Anne Boleyn (descended from Godfrey 

* Vide page 88. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


173 


Boleyn, or Bolaine, Lord Mayor of London in 1457) was, 
upon her coronation, conducted by the Mayor and all the 
City companies from Greenwich, by water, to the Tower; 
and thence, by land, to St. Paul’s, and afterwards to West¬ 
minster. In gorgeous pomp and stately magnificence, it 
would be difficult to imagine this joyous procession surpassed. 
Within three years afterwards, the hapless Queen terminated 
her brief career of royalty upon the green within the Tower; 
where, at the behest of a sanguinary tyrant, “who never 
spared man in his anger nor woman in his lust,” her blood 
flowed at the stroke of the executioner ! 

In the course of this reign, which terminated in 1547, the 
Strand, Holborn, Whitechapel, and most of the other chief 
thoroughfares of the metropolis, were paved. Water was also 
conveyed into the City in additional streams from Hampstead, 
Marylebone, Hackney, Muswell-hill, and the springs of 
Agnes le Clair, Hoxton. 

During the brief reign of Edward the Sixth many salutary 
regulations were effected, and numerous benefits were con¬ 
ferred upon the City. By a new charter, its right and title 
to the jurisdiction of the borough of Southwark was con¬ 
firmed. To prevent injurious combinations between the 
butchers and graziers, the prices of cattle, through the 
different seasons, were fixed by law; as were also the prices 
of various other provisions. The company of Hanseatic, or 
German merchants, generally termed merchants of the Still- 
yard, having engrossed nearly the whole trade of the kingdom, 
was dissolved, and trade was thrown open. Christ’s Hospital, 
commonly called the Blue Coat School, was founded by 
Edward the Sixth for the “ innocent and fatherless.” * 

* This noble institution consisted at first of a grammar-school for hoys, 
and a separate school for girls. By Charles the Second it was further 
endowed with 1,000/. to found a school for the instruction of forty boys in 


174 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


It may not be deemed unworthy of notice, that, on her 
return from France, through England, in 1550, after the 
demise of her husband, the ill-fated Mary Queen of Scots was 
sumptuously entertained at the Bishop of London’s palace, by 
the Mayor and citizens, for four days successively. On her 
departure, she was attended by the chief nobility in a style of 
extraordinary magnificence. The Duke of Northumberland 
had in Cheapside one hundred men on horseback, armed with 
javelins; of whom forty were dressed in black velvet, with 
velvet hats and feathers, and golden chains about their necks: 
next to them were ranged one hundred and twenty horsemen 
belonging to the Earl of Pembroke, with javelins, hats and 
feathers; then one hundred gentlemen and yeomen belonging 
to the Lord Treasurer, with javelins; the procession closing 
with three bodies of horse extending from the end of Gutter- 
lane, in Cheapside, to Birchin-lane, in Cornhill. The Queen 
of Scots was attended by all the nobility to Shoreditch 
Church, and thence conducted by the sheriffs of London to 
Waltham. 


mathematics and navigation. A second mathematical school for thirty- 
six boys was subsequently founded by Mr. Travers. There are now on the 
foundation nearly 1,200 children. The Mayor and Corporation are 
guardians of the institution. The building, occupying the site of the 
ancient order of Franciscans, founded in 1225, is very irregular. The 
ancient cloisters, serving as a place of recreation for the boys in wet weather, 
have been lately replaced by new ones, the masonry of which is remarkably 
fine. The south-front, opening to Newgate-street, is ornamented with 
Doric pilasters, and a statue of the royal founder. A new and commodious 
hall, of the Tudor style of architecture, and forming a beautiful feature in 
the public eye, has lately been built from designs by John Shaw, F.sq. 
Several of the wards, and other portions of the structure, have been rebuilt 
in a style admirably corresponding with the more ancient parts of the 
edifice. The revenues of the Hospital are very considerable. The annual 
expenditure amounts to 30,000/. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


175 


As related to the City of London, the most remarkable 
incident in the reign of Queen Mary was the rebellion 
originated in Kent by Sir Thomas Wyatt. To oppose his 
force, on its march to attack the City, five hundred men were 
confided to the command of Alexander Brett, an experienced 
officer. At Rochester, however, Brett harangued his men, 
and succeeded in carrying them over to the rebel army. In 
consequence, many of the chief officers of the Duke of 
Norfolk’s force fled in terror, and their ordnance, ammunition, 
and equipage, fell into the hands of Wyatt. London was 
thus thrown into a state of the utmost consternation. At 
length, after a series of successes, Wyatt was compelled to 
surrender, and his crime was expiated under the axe on 
Tower-hill. 

At this period, taverns and places of similar resort had so 
perniciously increased in number, that it became expedient 
to restrict them by law. It was accordingly enacted, that 
the number of retailers of wine within the City and liberties 
of London should not exceed forty, nor those of Westminster 
three. French wines were then sold, duty free, at 8 cl. per 
gallon, and other wines in proportion. 

Upon the demise of Queen Mary (1558), her sister the 
Princess Elizabeth was proclaimed Queen in London, with 
the usual solemnities, heightened by the extraordinary and 
heartfelt joy which was experienced on the occasion. On the 
14th of January, 1559, she rode through the City to West¬ 
minster in state, in the most pompous manner. At the upper 
end of Cheapside, she was presented by the Recorder with a 
thousand marks in gold in a purse of crimson velvet, richly 
embroidered, as a sincere testimony of the unfeigned love and 
respect of the citizens towards her Majesty. In July follow¬ 
ing, the twelve principal corporations of London sent out 
twelve companies, consisting of fourteen hundred men, of 


176 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


whom eight hundred were pike-men in bright armour, to be 
reviewed in Greenwich-park before the Queen. 

The year 1561 was memorable from the circumstance of 
the steeple of St. Paul’s Church, and a great part of the 
building, being destroyed by lightning. And the same year 
the plague committed great ravages in the City. 

In 1566, Sir Thomas Gresham, a merchant and citizen of 
London, proposed to the corporation that if they would find 
a convenient site, he would erect, at his own cost, a commo¬ 
dious edifice or bourse, for the accommodation of merchants. 
A fine building was accordingly opened in November, 1567. 
It was originally called the Bourse, but, on the visit of the 
Queen Elizabeth and her Court to the City on the 23d of 
January, 1570, when her Majesty dined with Sir Thomas, at 
his mansion in Bishopsgate-street, she caused it to be publicly 
proclaimed as the Royal Exchange. At his death, Sir Thomas 
Gresham bequeathed it to his widow, and after her decease, 
to the Mayor and citizens of London, and to the Mercers’ 
Company; directing the rents to be expended in the support 
of lectures on the sciences. This building was destroyed by 
the great fire of 1666, and was quickly rebuilt nearly upon its 
former site, with statues of the Kings, and of Sir Thomas 
Gresham, at an expense of nearly 100,000/. Sir Christopher 
Wren, or, according to some accounts, Mr. Edward Jerman, 
was the architect. It was opened on the 28th of September, 
1669, only three years after the destruction of the original 
building. A few years since, it was substantially repaired, 
and a new clock-tower was erected from the designs, and 
under the superintendence of George Smith, Esq., architect 
to the Mercers’ Company, at the joint expense of that 
company and the Corporation of London. This edifice was 
destined to experience the fate of its predecessor. On the 
night of the 10th of January, 1838, a fire broke out in 










j: Woods, 






















































































































DESTROYED BY .FIRE JANT IOF 1 1838. 
































































. 


. 













HISTORY OF LONDON. 


177 


Lloyd’s Coffee-room, at the north-east corner of the building, 
opposite the Bank of England. A considerable time elapsed 
before the requisite assistance for arresting the progress of 
the flames could be obtained; and the consequence was the 
entire destruction of one of the noblest monuments of British 
wealth and mercantile power. 

The Gresham Lectures, endowed by Sir Thomas, were 
formerly delivered in one of the rooms of the Royal Ex¬ 
change. Since the fire, they have been delivered in the 
theatre of the City of London School, a new and handsome 
structure, occupying the site of Honey-lane-market, in the 
rear of the houses facing Bow Church, in Cheapside.* 

* It will be only anticipating the order of time to state, that the first 
stone of this school was-laid by Lord Brougham, on the 21st of October, 
1835, and that it was opened in February, 1837. The design was by James 
Bunstone Bunning, Esq., architect to the Foundling Hospital. It is an 
imposing building, in the style of the Elizabethan age, the principal 
windows and entrance being of an earlier period, and more enriched 
character. Excepting the chief portion of the centre compartment, of the 
principal front, which is nearly all of stone, it is executed in white brick 
with stone dressings. The porch of the centre is novel, and the entrance 
to the interior is by a splendid hall. The school contains nine class-rooms 
and a library, rooms for the masters, a theatre for lectures, apartments for 
the secretaries, offices for the servants, &c. John Carpenter, the original 
founder of the school, was town-clerk of London in the reigns of Henry the 
Fifth and Henry the Sixth. By his will he gave and devised to the City 
of London the sum of nineteen pounds ten shillings per annum, arising 
from houses in the City ; directing the same to be expended in the education 
of four sons of freemen of London. By the improved value of property, 
the present clear annual income of the estate is not less than nine hundred 
pounds. The state of the charity was investigated in 1833, and the City 
afterwards obtained an Act of Parliament for establishing the present 
school. The candidates for admission are the sons of freemen of the City, 
or householders therein. Four scholarships have been founded on the 
suggestion of Carpenter’s will, upon a certificate of merit from the head 
master. Four boys, are educated, boarded, and clothed, and receive the sum 


A A 


178 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


The first public lottery in England was drawn at the west* 
gate of St. Paul’s Cathedral, in 1569. The drawing com¬ 
menced on the 11th of January, and continued, without 
ceasing, day and night, till the 6th of May following. 

At the Midsummer following, the pompous cavalcade of 
the City marching watch was discontinued on account of its 
enormous expense; and in lieu thereof a system of night 
police was established, which was continued until within these 
few years. 

The poulterers of London having by combination greatly 
enhanced the prices of poultry, the Corporation settled the 
prices according to the following table:— 



£. 

s. 

d. 

£. 

s. 

d 

The best goose at . . 

0 

3 

0 

The best woodcock . 0 

0 

5 

The best wild mallard 

0 

0 

5 

The green plover . . 0 

0 

3 

The best capon, at 

0 

1 

0 

Pigeons, per dozen . 0 

1 

0 

The second sort . . 

0 

0 

10 

Blackbirds, ditto . . 0 

0 

10 

The best hen . . . 

0 

0 

7 

Rabbits, each ... 0 

0 

3 

The best chickens, 




The best eggs, five for 0 

0 

1 

each. 

0 

0 

3 

The best butter, per 



An inferior sort . . 

0 

0 

H 

pound.0 

0 

3 


Other regulations respecting costume are not less curious. 
Luxury having made great inroads amongst the chief citizens 
of London, they had become so extravagant in dress, that in 
the year 1579 the Queen found it necessary to issue a pro¬ 
clamation against excess of apparel, gold chains, and cloaks, 
the last of which were worn of such length that they reached 
to the heels. By the same proclamation, the length of 
daggers was limited to twelve inches clear of the hilts; and 

of one hundred pounds each towards their advancement. The instruction 
given is of a high character. An annual public examination takes place, 
at which prizes are distributed. There is a head master, and twelve others 
in the various departments; and, as they are allowed to receive pupils, the 
number is upwards of five hundred. 









.jm 


L'EcOLE Df. La Vllle tie Londr.es. 


BOBE-S C RULE TER START LONDON. 





















































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


179 


three feet only was allowed for the length of swords. Three 
years afterwards, the apprentices of London, encouraged by 
the example of their superiors, had reached such an excess in 
their style of apparel, that the Lord Mayor and Common 
Council found it necessary to enact:— 

“ That from thenceforth no apprentice whatsoever should presume, 1. To 
wear any apparel hut what he receives from his master. 2. To wear no hat 
within the City and liberty thereof, nor anything in stead thereof, than a 
woollen cap, without any silk in or about the same. 3. To wear no ruffles, 
cuffs, loose collar, nor other thing than a ruff at the collar, and that only cf 
a yard and a-half long. 4. 'To wear no doublets but what were made of 
canvas, fustian, sack-cloth, English leather, or woollen-cloth, and without 
being enriched with any manner of gold, silver, or silk. 5. To wear no 
other coloured cloth or kersey, in hose or stockings, than white, blue, or 
russet. 6. To wear little breeches, of the same stuffs as the doublets, and 
without being stitched, laced, or bordered. 7. To wear a plain upper coat 
of cloth or leather, without pinking, stitching, edging, or silk about it. 
8. To wear no other surtout than a cloth gown or cloak lined or faced with 
cloth, cotton, or baize, with a fixed round collar without stitching, guarding, 
lace, or silk. 9. To wear no pumps, slippers, nor shoes, but of English 
leather, without being pinked, edged, or stitched, nor girdles nor garters 
other than of crewel, woollen, thread, or leather, without being garnished. 
10. To wear no sword, dagger, or other weapon but a knife; nor a ring, 
jewel of gold, nor silver, nor silk, in any part of his apparel, on pain of 
being punished at the discretion of the master for the first offence; to be 
publicly whipped at the hall of his company for a second offence; and to 
serve six months longer than specified in his indenture for a third offence.” 

It was further enacted, “That no apprentice should 
frequent or go to any dancing, fencing, or musical schools, 
nor keep any chest, press, or other place for keeping of 
apparel or goods, but in his master’s house, under the 
penalties aforesaid.” 

It is remarkable with what facility the City appears to have 
been able to raise vast bodies of men in cases of emergency. 
On the first rumour of a Spanish invasion in 1585, the several 
Corporations sent a handsome body of five thousand men into 


180 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the field, completely armed, at their own expense. Soon 
afterwards, the same companies fitted out a considerable body 
of soldiers, who were sent to the assistance of the Dutch 
against the Spaniards. In 1587, the threat of Spanish in¬ 
vasion still operating in terrorem , ten thousand men were 
raised in the City. The armada having been dispersed, 
apprehensions were yet entertained of future attacks, and, 
in 1596, the Lord Mayor and aldermen while at church 
received a message from the Queen, commanding them forth¬ 
with to raise a certain number of able-bodied men, fit for 
immediate service. On this warlike mission, they instantly 
left the church: before eight at night they had pressed a 
thousand men, and with an unparalleled expedition they com¬ 
pletely fitted them with martial accoutrements before the next 
morning. This little army, raised as it were by magic, dis¬ 
appeared as suddenly: intended to proceed to Dover to assist 
the French against the Spaniards in defence of Calais, it was 
dismissed before it had been full four-and-twenty hours as¬ 
sembled. Soon afterwards, the same number of men were 
impressed in the churches of the City during the time of 
Divine service. They were immediately armed and sent off 
towards Dover to embark for France, but in consequence of 
intelligence of the reduction of Calais, they were counter¬ 
manded and came home about a week after their departure. 
On many occasions the citizens also raised a considerable 
naval force. 

At the summer sessions in 1585, there were discovered to 
be in London, Westminster, Southwark, and the suburbs, no 
fewer than eighteen houses for the lodging and entertaining of 
thieves of all descriptions, “ Amongst the rest,” observes 
Maitland, “ they found out one Wotton, a gentleman born, 
and sometime a merchant of good credit, but fallen by time 
into decay. This man kept an ale-house, at Smart’s Key, 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


181 


near Billingsgate, and after, for some misdemeanour put down, 
he reared up a new trade of life; and in the same house he 
procured all the cut-purses about the City to repair to his 
house. There was a school-house set up to learn young boys 
to cut purses. Two devices were hung up, one was a pocket 
and another was a purse: the pocket had in it certain 
counters, and was hung about with hawk’s-bells, and over the 
top did hang a little sacring-bell; the purse had silver in it: 
and he that could take out a counter without any noise was 
allowed to be a public foyster: and he that could take a piece 
of silver out of the purse without noise of any of the bells, 
was adjudged a judicial nypper, according to their terms of 
art. A foyster was a pick-pocket, a nypper was a pick-purse 
or cut-purse.” 

It was in the year 1585, that the first instance appears 
upon record of the custom of the Lord Mayor’s nominating 
sheriffs by drinking to persons considered qualified for the 
execution of that office. 

Queen Elizabeth having terminated a long and glorious 
reign in the year 1603, was immediately succeeded by James 
the First, who was proclaimed King in the City on the 24th 
of March, with every demonstration of joy. 

Notwithstanding the short-sighted policy of the pedant 
King, who appears to have been incessantly haunted by the 
idea that the metropolis had outgrown itself, and that re¬ 
strictive measures were necessary to prevent its further excess, 
many local improvements were effected in the course of his 
inglorious career. Sir Hugh Myddelton completed his ad¬ 
mirable scheme of supplying the City with water by means 
of the New River; the footpaths of the principal streets 
were, for the first time, paved with flag-stones; Spitalfields 
began to be covered with houses; a large pond in the vicinity 
of Smithfield was filled up, and transformed into thorough- 


182 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


fares under the names of Cow, Chick, Hosier, and other 
lanes; the extensive fields and gardens of the grand priory of 
St. John of Jerusalem, and of a convent to the north of 
Clerkenwell-green, were built upon; Holborn gradually 
stretched away westward till it formed a junction with the 
village of St. Giles-in-the-Fields; and twelve new public 
granaries were erected at Bridewell, sufficiently capacious to 
hold six thousand quarters of corn, to be sold to the poor at 
prime cost in case of dearth or famine. The Levant or 
Turkey Company were incorporated under a perpetual 
charter, by the designation of the Merchants of England 
trading to the Levant seas; the London and Liverpool 
merchants went on successfully, and unrivalled, in their 
Greenland fishery; and the Merchants Adventurers’ Company 
—those of the Staple, the Russia, and the East India Com¬ 
panies—made a progress so vast in the respective branches 
of their commerce, that, in the year 1613, the money paid 
for exports and imports in London alone amounted to 
109,572/. 185. M .—nearly thrice as much as all the other 
ports of England paid in the same year. 

The monastery of the Carthusian Friars, near Smithfield, 
having been granted, on the suppression of the order, to the 
Earl of Suffolk, Mr. Thomas Sutton, in 1612, purchased it 
of that noble family for the sum of 13,000/., and laid out 
7,000/. more in repairs and improvements, intending to render 
it at once a seminary of literature, and an asylum for decayed 
merchants, &c.; he also endowed it with lands, producing, at 
that time, 4,490/. a-year. This excellent institution, now 
inaccurately known by the name of the Charter Flouse, has 
given education to some of the first scholars of our time, and 
is in a very flourishing state. 

In the year following, Sir Baptist Hicks (afterwards created 
Viscount Campden), one of the justices of the peace for the 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


183 


county of Middlesex, at his own expense built a sessions- 
house for the accommodation of the magistracy, at the bottom 
of St. John-street. This was called Hicks’s Hall, in honour 
of the founder; and, for many years, it constituted the point 
from which distances on that line of road were measured. 

It was about the year 1617, that several of the bishops 
applied to the King for leave for the people to amuse them¬ 
selves on Sundays. James, willing to indulge the prelates in 
their request, as well as the people in their pleasures, caused 
certain rules to be drawn up and published, under the royal 
sanction, entitled, The Book of Sports; with a positive in¬ 
junction to the several parochial incumbents to read the same 
in their respective churches, upon pain of the King’s dis¬ 
pleasure. Many of them, proving refractory, were suspended 
and imprisoned. The Lord Mayor, despite of the Royal 
licence, caused the King’s carriages to be stopped, as they 
were passing through the City on a Sunday in the time of 
Divine service. For a time, these proceedings induced an ill 
feeling between the Court and the City, but it speedily 
subsided. 

The reign of the unfortunate Charles the First commenced 
inauspiciously. In its first year, the plague raged most 
destructively in London and its suburbs; carrying off 35,417 
persons—about one-third of the inhabitants. 

Without entering into particulars, which want of space 
precludes, it may be remarked, that, from the commencement 
of his reign, Charles and the City were at variance. Disputes 
arose in relation to ship-money, loans, and other grievances. 
The City was deprived of some advantages gained in the pre¬ 
ceding reign, and amerced in 50,0007. The citizens, taking 
part with the Parliament against the King, strengthened their 
City with forts, joined by a line of communication, formed by 


184 


HISTORY OF- LONDON. 


a rampart of earth, which completely surrounded London, 
Westminster, and Southwark. 

Shortly after Charles’s execution, Sir Abraham Reynardson, 
then Lord Mayor, refusing to proclaim the abolition of 
monarchy, was degraded from his office, and imprisoned, and 
a new Mayor chosen in his room. 

In 1657, the Lord Mayor assisted at the inauguration of 
Cromwell; but, after the death of that usurper, the City 
joined with General Monk in bringing about the restoration. 
On the 29th of May, 1660, the Lord Mayor and Aldermen 
went out and met Charles the Second in St. George’s-fields. 

At the close of this, and commencement of the following 
year (1661), London became the theatre of an extraordinary 
insurrection, originating with a small number of wild, des¬ 
perate, and sanguinary enthusiasts, called “ Fifth-Monarchy 
Men.” From the appearance of certain dangerous symptoms, 
Colonel Overton, Major Wild, Cornet Day, and other prin¬ 
cipal members of the sect, had been arrested. This proceeding 
so incensed their confederates, that, assembling in their 
meeting-house in Swan-alley, Coleman-street, on the evening 
of Sunday, the 6th of January, about sixty in number, well 
armed, they broke into open rebellion, under the conduct of 
their preacher, Thomas Venner, a cooper. Possessed with 
the fanatical notions, “ that no weapon formed against them 
should prosper, nor a hair of their heads be touched—that 
one should chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to 
flight”—their design was to erect a Fifth Monarchy for the 
personal reign of Jesus Christ upon earth. In their “ De¬ 
claration,” entitled, “ A Door of Hope opened,” they affirmed, 
“That they would never sheath their swords, till Babylon 
(as they called Monarchy) became a hissing and a curse; and 
there be left neither remnant, son, nor nephew: that, when 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


185 


they had led captivity captive in England, they would go into 
France, Spain, Germany, &c., and rather die than take the 
wicked oaths of supremacy and allegiance: that they would 
not make any leagues with monarchists, but would rise up 
against the carnal, to possess the gate, or the world, to bind 
their kings in chains, and their nobles in fetters of iron.” 

Having read their proclamation, they marched to St. Paul’s 
church-yard, and declaring for King Jesus, they killed a man 
who declared for King Charles. Sir Richard Brown, the 
Lord Mayor, receiving intelligence of this, hastened with a 
party of the trained-bands to suppress the riot. The rebels, 
however, fell upon this force with an impulse of infatuation so 
incredible, that it was speedily routed. Marching, without 
opposition, towards Bishopsgate, and through Whitecross- 
street, they re-entered the City at Cripplegate. Learning that 
a party of horse was in pursuit of them, they thence retreated 
as far as Beech-lane; where, being opposed, they killed a 
constable, and proceeded to Caen-wood, in the neighbourhood 
of Hampstead. There they reposed for the night. Next day 
they were dispossessed of the wood by a military force, and 
some of them taken prisoners. The day after, they rallied 
again and returned to London, when they divided themselves 
into two parties, one marching towards Leadenhall, the other 
to Haberdashers’ Hall, in Maiden-lane, with the view of sur¬ 
prising the Lord Mayor. The former were pursued by the 
trained-bands, and, after an obstinate resistance, dispersed in 
Eastcheap. The latter, headed by Venner, missed the Lord 
Mayor, and passed into Wood-street, where they encountered 
the trained-bands, and also a party of the horse-guards who 
had come to their assistance. A desperate battle ensued ; 
and the rebels continued fighting till Venner was dangerously 
wounded and taken, and two others of their preachers and 
fiercest combatants were killed. A retreat towards Cripple- 


B B 


186 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


gate was then commenced; the rear firing in good order upon 
the troops in pursuit. More effectually to prevent the 
advance of the military, Colonel Cox, their commanding 
officer, posted ten men in a neighbouring alehouse, which they 
defended with great energy till it was surrounded and entered 
on all sides, and seven of the rebels killed. The quelling of 
this desperate commotion, though on so small a scale, cost 
the lives of twenty of the King’s troops, besides several of the 
trained-bands and others. Of the rebels, about twenty men 
were killed and fourteen taken; eleven of whom were after¬ 
wards tried, convicted, and executed; and thus terminated a 
petty insurrection, which, for a few days, assumed a formidable 
aspect. 

In 1663, the King granted the City a confirmation of all 
its ancient charters, privileges, liberties, rights, and customs ; 
and the citizens in return advanced considerable sums of 
money towards carrying on the war with Holland, for which 
they received the thanks of both Houses of Parliament. An 
extraordinary mark of his Majesty’s favour towards the City 
of London was his confirmation of the Irish estates in the 
province of Ulster to the citizens, of which they had been 
violently deprived by an arbitrary decree of the Star Chamber 
during his father’s reign. By this tenure the City of London 
and the several companies concerned are still in the enjoy¬ 
ment of these estates. 

The metropolis was now to experience calamities of the 
most disastrous nature. Scarcely, as it may be said, had the 
sword of civil war been sheathed, than heaven in its dis¬ 
pensation destroyed its inhabitants by pestilence, to the extent 
of a hundred thousand persons, in the awful year 1665;* and 
in the following year its entire surface was desolated by fire* 
Whether it be considered with reference to its immediate 
* For particulars relating to the plague of the year 1665, vide page 127. 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


187 


effects or to its remote consequences, the latter was one of 
the most important events that ever occurred in London. 
Ihe conflagration of 1666 broke out about one o’clock in the 
morning of Sunday, the 2d of September; being impelled by 
strong winds it raged with irresistible fury, nor was it entirely 
mastered until the fifth day after it began. It originated in 
the house of one Farryner, the King’s baker, in Pudding-lane, 
near New Fish-street-hill, and within ten houses of Lower 
Thames-street, into which it spread within a short time ; 
nearly all the contiguous buildings being of timber, and lath 
and plaster, and the whole neighbourhood consisting of little 
else than close passages, and narrow lanes and alleys. Its 
ravages were at length stayed at the Temple church, near 
Holborn-bridge, Pie-corner, Aldersgate, Cripplegate, near the 
end of Coleman-street, at the end of Basinghall-street, by the 
Postern, at the upper end of Bishopsgate-street, Leadenhall* 
street, at the Standard in Cornhill, at the church in Fen- 
chufch-street, near Cloth workers’ Hall, in Mincing-lane, at 
the middle of Park-lane, and at the Tower-dock. The 
destructive fury of this conflagration was never, perhaps, 
exceeded in any part of the world, by any fire originating in 
accident. Within the walls it consumed nearly five-sixths of 
the whole City, and without the walls it cleared a space 
almost as extensive as the one-sixth part left unburnt within. 
Hardly a single building that came within the range of the 
flames was left standing. Public edifices, churches, and 
dwelling-houses, were involved in one common fate; and, 
making due allowance for irregularities, the fire may be said 
to have extended its ravages over a space of ground equal to 
an oblong square of a mile and a half in length, and half a 
mile in breadth. In the summary account of this tremendous 
devastation, given in one of the inscriptions on the Monu¬ 
ment, and which was drawn up from the reports of the sur- 


188 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


veyors appointed after the fire, it is stated that the ruins of 
the City were four hundred and thirty-six acres (viz., three 
hundred and seventy-three within the walls, and sixty-three 
without the walls, but within the liberties); that of the six- 
and-twenty wards, it utterly destroyed fifteen, and left eight 
others shattered and half burnt; and that it consumed eighty- 
nine churches, four of the City-gates, Guildhall, many public 
structures, hospitals, schools, libraries, a great number of 

t * 

stately edifices, thirteen thousand two hundred dwelling-houses, 
and four hundred streets. The aggregate loss of property sus¬ 
tained on this occasion has been roughly estimated at from 
seven to upwards of ten millions sterling. Whether this 
calamity were the effect of accident or of design, is a question 
that has been productive of much controversy; but there 
are many circumstances upon record which combine to enforce 
a belief that the fire had been preconcerted by the Papists. 
Fortunately, however, amidst all the confusion and multiplied 
dangers which arose from the fire, it does not appear that 
more than six persons lost their lives. 

Great exertions were made both by Government and indi¬ 
viduals to re-edify the City, and the Parliament, acting on the 
King’s proclamation, passed an Act for regulating the buildings 
and expediting the work. While this was in progress, various 
temporary edifices were raised for the public accommodation, 
both with respect to Divine worship and to general business. 
Gresham College, which had escaped the flames, was con¬ 
verted into an Exchange and Guildhall, and the Royal 
Society, founded only two or three years before, removed its 
sittings to Arundel House. The affairs of the Custom House 
were transacted in Mark-lane; the business of the Excise- 
office was carried on in Southampton-fields, near Bedford 
House; the General Post-office was removed to Brydges- 
street, Covent-garden; the offices of Doctors’-commons, were 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


189 


held at Exeter House, in the Strand; and the King’s ward¬ 
robe was consigned from Puddle-wharf to York-buildings. 
For a time, the inhabitants were chiefly lodged in huts raised 
in Finsbury and Moorfields, in Smithfield, and on all the 
open spaces in the vicinity of the metropolis. 

Amongst the several plans that were proposed for the 
restoration of the capital, were three which acquired much 
celebrity: the first was designed by Dr., afterwards Sir 
Christopher Wren, surveyor-general and principal architect 
for rebuilding the whole City; the second by Mr., afterwards 
Sir John Evelyn; the third by Dr. Newcourt, father of 
Richard Newcourt, author of the “ Repertorium, or Eccle¬ 
siastical History of the diocese of London.” Neither of these 
plans, however, “ could be adopted in practice, though every 
person was convinced of the advantages that would eventually 
result; for the jealousies of the citizens, lest they should be 
too far removed from the sites of their old residences, proved 
to be insuperable, and very few would recede from their 
claims to particular spots. From that cause the opportunity 
was lost of rendering this metropolis the most magnificent of 
any in the world. Still, however, much was effected; avenues 
were widened, declivities raised, and obstacles removed. And 
although all was not done that might have been executed, 
under the influence of other feelings, the entire City (with the 
exception of the churches and larger public buildings) was 
rebuilt within little more than four years, and in a style of far 
greater splendour and regularity, and infinitely more com¬ 
modious and healthful than the ancient capital.” One of the 
great advantages of this change was the total extermination 
of the plague, which has never since made its appearance in 
London. * 

* The fullest particulars of the fire of London are to be found in Lord 
Clarendon’s “ History of his own Life in the Diaries of Evelyn and Pepys; 


190 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


The Monument, on Fish-street-hill, erected by Sir Chris¬ 
topher Wren, to commemorate the fire of 1666, was com¬ 
menced in 1671, and finished in 1677. It is fluted, of the 
Doric order, and stands on a massy pedestal forty feet high. 
This column exceeds in height the famous pillars of Trajan 
and Antoninus at Rome, and contains upwards of twenty 
thousand square feet of Portland-stone. 

James the Second ascended a throne (1685) upon which he 
was unworthy to sit. His enmity against the City of London 
was never effaced; and though he restored a charter of which 
he had been the means of depriving the citizens, it was pusil¬ 
lanimity alone that impelled his conduct. The sacrifice of 
Alderman Cornish, alleged to have been implicated in the 
Rye-house plot, was an act of cold-blooded revenge, inex¬ 
cusable as it was base. Another act of his tyranny was the 
commitment of the seven bishops to the Tower. The power 
of the Papists was for a brief period in the ascendant. 
James, however, saw when too late that the popular resent¬ 
ment was more than mere popular clamour; and in the deep 
discontent of his people, he beheld the fatal errors he had 
committed, and would have retracted the steps he had taken 
in favour of Papal jurisdiction. His concessions were as 
mean as his tyranny had been excessive. On his abdication 
of the throne which he had disgraced, about thirty of the 
peers and bishops then in town (being the only remaining 
authority in the State) met at Guildhall; and after a short 
consultation with the Lord Mayor and aldermen, it was 
resolved to adhere to the Prince of Orange, subsequently 

in a tract, entitled, “ God’s Terrible Advice to the City, by Plague and 
Fire,” by the Rev. T. Vincent, a Non-conformist divine ; in Malcolm’s 
‘‘Londinium Redivivum,” &c. There is also an ably-condensed view of 
the subject, to which we have been indebted in the above sketch, in Brayley’s 
“ Londiniana,” vol, i., page 148, et scq. 


























UR0EH©U$E CHUKC1H! 


7.u Limehovse 


I' Eglise De Lime ho use 


London. Published Oct r Z nd l831 by WS. Orr Sc C° Amen. Corner. 


Kir che 
































































. 














































. 








































♦ 





















- ✓ • ; ‘ 

■ • ' **■ 

* 

■ 

























































✓ 













































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


191 


proclaimed King as William the Third, with his consort, Mary 
the Second, the daughter of James. 

In the year 1687, the City had been greatly enriched, and 
its population increased, by the settlement of between thirteen 
and fourteen thousand French Protestants, who, driven by 
persecution from their native home, sought an asylum in this 
country of civil and religious liberty. These children of 
peaceful industry took up their abode chiefly in Spitalfields 
and the parts adjacent. 

In the reign of William and Mary, certain places of sup¬ 
posed privilege from arrest in the City were suppressed: that 
in the Minories; those in and near Fleet-street, as Salisbury- 
court, Whitefriars, Ram-alley, and Mitre-court; in Holborn, 
Fullwood’s-rents, and Bald win’ s-gardens, in Gray’s-inn-lane ; 
the Savoy, in the Strand; in Southwark, Montague-close, 
Deadman’s-place, the Clink, and the Mint. 

King William, who had survived his consort, dying in 1702, 
the Princess Anne, daughter of the late King James, and 
consort of his Royal Highness George, Prince of Denmark, 
succeeded to the Crown, to the universal delight of the 
nation. During the preceding reign, she had suffered many 
petty persecutions from the King, her brother-in-law, who, 
whatever he might be as a ruler, had little that was amiable 
in his character as a man. Consequent upon the several 
splendid victories achieved by the Duke of Marlborough, the 
Queen, in testimony of her gratitude to the Almighty, for his 
great and glorious success, visited St. Paul’s church in solemn 
procession. On the humble request of the citizens of London, 
all the standards and colours taken by the British troops at 
the battle of Ramillies, were presented to the City by order 
of her Majesty. In this reign an order was given for building 
fifty new churches, which greatly improved the appearance of 
the metropolis. # 

* It may be worth while to mention, if only in a note, that, at the com- 


192 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


On the death of her Majesty Queen Anne (1714), George 
Lewis, the eldest son of Ernest Augustus, Duke and Elector 


mencement of the eighteenth century, the village of St. Marylebone was 
almost a mile distant from any part of London, the nearest street being Old 
Bond-street, which then hardly extended to the present Clifford-street. 
Soon after the accession of George the First, New Bond-street arose, with 
other streets in the immediate neighbourhood, and the houses in Berkeley- 
square and its vicinity. Hanover-square and Cavendish-square were open 
fields in the year 1716. They were built about the beginning of the reign 
of George the Second, at which time the houses arose on the north-side of 
Oxford-street, which then first took the name. The neighbourhood of 
Cavendish-square and Oxford-market, Holles-street, Margaret-street, Vere- 
street, &c., are of the same date; and the grounds for Harley, Wigmore, 
and Mortimer-streets, were laid out, the village and church of Marylebone 
being still separated from them all by fields. At the same time the Legis¬ 
lature ordered the erection of the three parishes of St. George, Bloomsbury, 
St. Anne, Limehouse, and St. Paul, Deptford ; London having then extended 
further in the last quarter than in any other, by reason of the trade on the 
river. 

About the year 1737, the west-end of the town was improved by the 
addition of Grosvenor-square and its neighbourhood. Anticipating time, it 
may be added, that the increase of the metropolis on all sides was in pro¬ 
portion to the length of the reign of George the Third. The vacant space 
near Marylebone was filled in; Southwark became a mass of houses 
united with Westminster; and new towns, rather than suburbs, appeared in 
all quarters; some with the names of towns, as Camden-town and Somers- 
town ; to which have been added, since the death of that Prince, Portland- 
town, and a large half of Paddington, now almost joined with Kilburn. 
Then, again, the whole of the extensive space from Goodman’s-fields to 
Stepney, over Whitechapel-road to Sliadwell, has been covered with closely- 
compacted habitations. The London, the St. Katherine’s, and the East 
and West India Docks, have been constructed, and the space to Hackney, 
Bethnal-green, and Mile-end, built upon. The neighbourhood of the 
respective new churches in Marylebone and tlje Regent’s-park, presents a 
succession of noble mansions. 

Public convenience and the improved state of society called for enlarged 
thoroughfares; and crowded districts have been converted into noble streets, 
lined with costly residences. Such was the origin of the architectural 


V 


























































































z* * 














. 





























































> 





























4 




























































' 



























HISTORY OF LONDON* 


193 


of Brunswick Lunenburg, by the Princess Sophia, youngest 
daughter of Frederick, Elector Palatine of the Rhine, and 

improvements in the vicinity of Pall-mall; and a magnificent line of streets, 
including Regent-street and the Quadrant, leading from St. James’s Park 
to the Regent’s Park. A stately range of elegant houses has heen formed 
on the site of Carlton Palace; dividing which, in the centre, his late 
Majesty William the Fourth, on ascending the throne, commanded a way 
to be broken into the park, and a fine flight of steps to be constructed 
for the accommodation of the public. At this point is a monument—a 
column of pale red granite, one hundred and fifty feet in height—erected 
to the memory of the late Duke of York. The column, ascended by a 
spiral staircase, is surmounted by a bronze statue of his Royal Highness. 

Exeter Change, and the line of old houses down the north side of the 
Strand, have been removed, the street widened, and many improvements 
made, while others are still in progress. That fine edifice, St. Martin’s 
church, now open to the view of the public, forms part of the eastern side 
of a spacious opening named Trafalgar-square; on the northern side of 
which is an unworthy structure, denominated the National Gallery of the 
Fine Arts; and in the centre of which is to be erected a public monument 
to the memory of Nelson. 

Fleet-market has been removed; and the opening now forms a wide 
and airy street, leading to Holborn-bridge, and which, it is expected, will, 
at no distant period, be carried on to Islington. Covent-garden-market has 
undergone an entire change, and is now not an object of commerce only, 
but of curiosity and interest. The new Hungerford-market, at the south¬ 
western extremity of the Strand, is finished, and proves a formidable com¬ 
petitor, not only to Billingsgate-market, but to that of Co vent-garden. 

The New Post-office, St. Martin’s-le-Grand, has long been in full 
activity; the Colosseum, and St. Katherine’s Hospital, in the Regent’s* 
park, are objects of considerable interest; and the Zoological Gardens, 
much enlarged, and considerably enriched by the liberality of their late 
Majesties, George the Fourth and William the Fourth, have become 
eminently attractive. 

The New Palace at Pimlico—Buckingham House remodelled at an 
enormous expense, and with lamentable deficiency of taste and judgment— 
is, from its having been made the chief residence of her present Majesty, 
Queen Victoria, and from the surrounding improvements, likely to become 
the centre of the Court end of the town, Belgrave-square, eclipsing in 


C C 


194 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


Elizabeth, eldest daughter of James the First, succeeded to 
the throne of Britain. His Majesty, accompanied by his 
eldest son, Prince George, arrived in England, and made his 
public entry into London on the 20th of September. He 
was received at St. Margaret’s-hill, Southwark, by the Lord 
Mayor, aldermen, sheriffs, and officers of the City, in whose 
name Sir Peter King, Recorder, addressed him in a con¬ 
gratulatory speech, and the King was received with every 
mark of public satisfaction. In this reign of thirteen years 
there is little of importance to record specifically relating to 
the City of London. In 1716, the “ Mug-house riot,” in¬ 
stigated by a low Jacobite rabble, was suppressed by the 
execution of five of the ringleaders, in front of a house which 
they had nearly demolished in Salisbury-court, Fleet-street. 
The same year, owing to a long-continued drought, the fresh 
stream of the Thames was reduced so low, that, by the inter¬ 
vention of a violent wind at west-south-west, the bed of the 
river became so dry that many thousands of people passed it 
on foot, both above and below London-bridge. Of all the 
affairs of the time, however, the South Sea bubble, as it was 
termed, was the most extraordinary. The sums of money 
proposed to be raised by this and about one hundred and 
sixty other joint-stock speculations, besides numbers which 
perished in embryo, amounted to 300,000,000/. The lowest 
of the shares of any of them advanced above cent, per cent. ; 
and most of them above 400/. per cent. A sum amounting to 
2,014,000/. was confiscated from the estates of those who were 
principally concerned in the South Sea transactions alone, 
towards making good the damage sustained. * 

magnificence all the other squares of the metropolis, is in its immediate 
neighbourhood; besides others which, though handsome, are of minor 
note .—Vide Leigh Hunt’s London Journal , Pictures of London, $*c. 

* In a list preserved of one hundred and fifty-six of the projected 

















































































































Z)F,li B (SCKING-HAMS CHE PAL LAS T 




































































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


195 


The reign of George the Second, commencing in 1727 and 
closing in 1760, was scarcely more prolific in incident, so far 
as the metropolis was concerned, than that of his predecessor. 
The Londoners, however, most loyally distinguished them¬ 
selves in their efforts against the cause of the Pretender. 
Large subscriptions were raised; the most substantial citizens 
entered into associations, armed themselves, learned the 
military exercise, and tendered their services; the lawyers of 
the Middle Temple formed themselves into a regiment; the 
trained-bands were reviewed by the King; and the promoters 
of order and the Protestant succession seemed united in 
repelling the invader of the Government and Constitution. 

Numerous improvements and salutary regulations were at 
this period effected. In 1751, an Act was passed for regu¬ 
lating the commencement of the year, and correcting the 
calendar;* by which, amongst other changes, the annual 
admission of the Lord Mayor was altered to the 8th of 
November, and the solemnity of swearing him in at the Court 

companies (some of which were actually incorporated) are the following, 
and several others equally ridiculous and unfit to be named :—for a flying- 
engine—for feeding hogs—for making iron with pit-coal—for curing the 
gout and stone—for transmuting quicksilver into a malleable metal—for 
an air-pump for the brain—for an insurance against divorces—for making 
butter from beech-trees—for making deal-boards from saw-dust—for 
japanning of shoes—for a scheme by which to teach wise men to cast 
nativities, &c. 

* It was by this statute enacted, “That the year should, for the future, 
begin on the 1st of January; and that the eleven intermediate or nominal 
days, between the 2d and 14th of September, 1752, should, for that year, 
be omitted; so that the day which would otherwise have been called the 
3d of September, was dated the 14th.” By this correction, the equinoxes 
and solstices happen nearly on the same nominal days on which they fell 
at the Coimcil of Nice, in the year 325. 


196 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of Exchequer, in Westminster, to the day following. Through 
a noble stand, made by the citizens, Sir Robert Walpole’s 
artful scheme for extending a general excise throughout the 
kingdom was subjected to a signal defeat. Amongst other 
regulations, the City gates were pulled down. Aldgate was 
sold for 177Z. 10s.; Cripplegate for 91/.; and Ludgate for 
148/.; to be taken down and removed by the purchaser within 
a limited time. The precinct of Blackfriars, which, from the 
dissolution of its monastery by Henry the Eighth, had claimed 
a privilege of exemption from the jurisdiction of the City, 
was, by a decision of the Court of King’s Bench, declared 
unentitled to the pretended exemption. Fleet-ditch, from 
Blackfriars to Holborn-bridge, long a serious nuisance to the 
public, was arched over; a pavement was formed, and a 
market erected upon it. A general reform of the London 
prisons was effected in this reign; considerable improvements 
were adopted in the mode of watching and lighting the streets 
of the City; and laudable exertions were repeatedly made for 
the suppression of liquor-shops, masquerades, and other 
immoral and mischievous nuisances. 

The reign of George the Second was remarkable for the 
number of its new and important undertakings and estab¬ 
lishments. Westminster-bridge was begun and finished 
—the Mansion House* was built—the Society of Anti¬ 
quaries was formed—and the British Museum, the Foundling, 
and the Small-pox Hospitals, were founded. 

The defective state of the police, and the superstitious 
notions which prevailed amongst the people, are curiously 

* The Mansion House was built from a plan by George Dance, architect, 
at an expense of 42,638/. 18s. 8 d. The chief corner-stone of the structure 
was laid on the 25th of October, 1739, by the Lord Mayor, Micaijah Perry, 
Esq. It was not completed till 1753. 



















, 




























' '■ . gi 









, - 

■ 

. 























_ 


























*■ ■*' s --v « 







— *■ * 




- 














* 

, *.• X 





' 




• *• . 


%•. -■ • 








J I. 




' 
















■ 






































































♦ 









\ 







































:* 


m 



















































































v- 














. 

























* 



































































■ . ■ V ■ * 






























HISTORY OF LONDON. 


197 


illustrated by two circumstances which it is expedient briefly 
to record. In 1728, London and Westminster were infested 
by street-robbers to an almost incredible extent. On one 
occasion, they formed a design to rob the Queen in St. Paul's 
churchyard, as she was privately returning from supper in 
the City to St. James’s; and the attempt was not made, only 
from the circumstance, that the villains were at the time 
busily engaged in robbing Sir Gilbert Heathcote, an alderman 
of London, on his return in his chariot from the House of 
Commons, her Majesty’s coach actually passing at the 
moment! However, by the adoption of rigorous measures, 
this crying evil was soon put down. 

In the month of August, 1754, two large and strange birds 
were seen perched, one on the cross and the other on the 
pine-apple of St. Paul’s cathedral. Some thought they were 
eagles, others said they were cormorants. On the firing of a 
gun from the gallery, they flew away. “ See ! see! ” ex¬ 
claimed the gazers, “ how the Spaniards fly away at the firing 
of a gun; nothing else will bring the Dons to reason ! ” 
This incident was turned to good account by the authorities. 
The necessities of the State, at this time, requiring a fleet to 
be suddenly manned, a live turkey was placed on the top of 
the Monument. This proved highly attractive—an idle mob 
was assembled—and the press-gangs, lying in wait, made 
prize of many who answered their purpose. 

George the Third’s extended reign of sixty years com¬ 
menced auspiciously; but it involved long periods of expensive 
warfare and consequent national privation—enemies inevitably 
of grand improvements, public or private. The present 
history, however, now draws so near towards its close, that a 
few leading dates and indications must stand in lieu of detailed 
records and descriptions. 

His Majesty, with his Royal consort, the Princess Charlotte 


198 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


of Mecklenburgh, was crowned, with due solemnity, in West¬ 
minster Abbey, on the 22d of September, 1761. A general 
peace ensued in 1763. In the autum of 1768, Christian the 
Seventh, King of Denmark, who had married the Princess 
Carolina Matilda, his Majesty’s younger sister, paid a visit to 
the Royal Family of England, and, amongst numerous other 
honours paid him, he was splendidly entertained at dinner, by 
the Lord Mayor, on the 23d of September. At the usual 
period of election, in 1769, William Reckford, Esq., of 
Font-hill, was chosen Lord Mayor, for the second time, for 
the year ensuing. This gentleman, by his strenuous assertion 
of the rights and privileges of the City, in opposition to the 
views of the Court, gave great offence to the latter. There 
is a marble tablet to his memory, in Guildhall, representing 
him robed, and in the act of delivering a remonstrance to the 
King on the 23d of May, 1770. The memorable “No 
Popery” riots of 1780, in which between four hundred and five 
hundred people were killed and wounded, were followed by a 
change of Ministry in 1781; and, in 1783, peace was con¬ 
cluded with France, Spain, Holland, and America, and the 
Shelburne Ministry was compelled to resign. In 1789, his 
Majesty’s recovering from a long and severe mental affliction 
was celebrated (April 26) by a procession of the Royal 
Family, attended by the two Houses of Parliament, to St. 
Paul’s cathedral to return thanks to Almighty God. The 
war of the French revolution, dooming millions to death, soon 
afterwards broke out, and was finally terminated only by 
the victory of Waterloo, achieved by Wellington on the 18th 
of June, 1815. For three great naval battles fought and 
gained by the Lords Howe, St. Vincent, and Duncan, the 
King, Queen, Royal Family, and Parliament, went in pro¬ 
cession to St. Paul’s to return thanks, on the 19th of Dec., 
1797. A brilliant general illumination followed. The peace* 

















' 

I 

- 












* 






















































































*-' ■ 

■ 






















. * • 




v, 






























V 





































I 



4 T S PARK 






































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


199 


or “ hollow armed truce of Amiens,” was proclaimed in 1801; 
but hostilities soon afterwards recommenced, and a threatened 
invasion by France called forth a patriotic volunteer spirit in 
the kingdom. In London and Westminster alone, and the 
parishes immediately adjacent, the number of effective volun¬ 
teers amounted to 27,077. This appears by the general 
orders which were issued from the Horse Guards, after the 
volunteer reviews by his Majesty in Hyde-park. A jubilee, 
in celebration of the King’s entrance on the fiftieth year of 
his reign, was held on the 25th of October, 1809. In 
February, 1811, the Prince of Wales was invested with the 
Regency; on which occasion he soon afterwards gave a grand 
fete to a company of two thousand persons at Carlton House. 
Consequent upon the abdication of Napoleon Buonaparte as 
Emperor of France, and tbe accession of Louis XVIII. 
to the throne of that kingdom, London was visited, in 
the summer of 1814, by a concourse of illustrious visitors, 
in number and rank surpassing any former example. At the 
head of those distinguished foreigners were the Emperor 
Alexander of Russia, and his sister the Duchess of Olden- 
burgh, and the King of Prussia with his sons. The 
splendour of their reception and the public festivities induced 
by their presence, were unprecedented. On the 9th of June 
the Sovereigns and Princes were received in state at Carlton 
House; and on the 18th, they were sumptuously entertained 
by the Mayor and Corporation of London at Guildhall. On the 
7th of the following month, the Prince Regent went in solemn 
state to St. Paul’s, to return thanks for the restoration of 
peace. On the 9th, the Duke of Wellington was entertained 
at Guildhall in the same magnificent manner that had been 
displayed when the Royal guests were present. All these 
gratifying exhibitions proved to be, in some measure, pre¬ 
mature. The security of France was again endangered, and 


200 


HISTORY OF LONDON. 


the peace of Europe disturbed, by the escape of Buonaparte 
from Elba, and his sudden reappearance in arms. However, 
the triumph of Waterloo terminated, in a few days, his Im¬ 
perial career; and the narrow boundaries of St. Helena 
became the resting-place of a spirit in whose eyes thrones had 
been but toys, and to whom the destinies of empires were 
familiar and subservient things. 

From the reign of George the Third, which finally closed 
on the 29th of January, 1820, is dated the foundation of the 
Royal Academy of Arts, the annual exhibitions of which were 
held at Somerset House, in the Strand, till 1837. In this 
reign also were built the bridges of Waterloo, Blackfriars, 
Southwark, and Vauxhall.* By the introduction of gas, 
in 1807, a noble improvement was effected in the illumination 
of streets and houses. 

His Majesty George the Fourth, was crowned in West¬ 
minster Abbey, on the 19th of July, 1820. On this occasion, 
the old crown of Edward the Confessor was used. The pro¬ 
cession from Westminster Hall to the Abbey was gorgeous 
beyond all precedent. At six in the evening, three hundred 
noble persons, besides the Royal Family, sat down to a 
sumptuous dinner in the Hall; the theatres were thrown 
open to the public; and illuminations and fireworks met the 
fascinated eye in every direction. 

As King, with all the forms of Royalty, his Majesty’s 
reign was brief. He expired on the 26th of June, 1830; and 
was succeeded by his next brother, William the Fourth, who, 
with his Royal consort, Queen Adelaide, was crowned, on 
the 8th of September, 1832. From the advanced age and 
infirmity of the Sovereign, his coronation was of a less osten¬ 
tatious character than that of his predecessor. 

On the 9th of November, 1830, their Majesties honoured 

* Vide page 69. 



- • v - ■ 


















'' •• 

• s ' 

' V- . 

- 









• • • • ' • . 









. 


* r 'f■ 

' ■ 


. . 









; ' ' *- ■ > ' v• 

• 1 • • ■ , • . , 







. 

















■ ■ 




- „V * • •' ' 

->V‘ • 


.... . 













1 


\ 



e 

o 

u 

d 

0 ) 

<; 

°d 

c 

o 

(/) 



co 

cO 

(X> 














































































HISTORY OF LONDON. 


201 


II 


the Lord Mayor and Corporation of London with their pre¬ 
sence at dinner in Guildhall. The arrangements for this 
festival were similar to those adopted on the visit of the 
Foreign Princes in 1814. 

The opening of the new London Bridge, on the 1st of Au¬ 
gust, 1831, was attended by their Majesties in state. On the 
King’s reaching the top of the landing-stairs, the sword and 
the keys of the City were tendered to him by the Lord Mayor ; 
when his Majesty was pleased to return them, signifying that 
they should remain in his Lordship’s hands. Adjacent to the 
site of the new Fishmongers’ Hall (a magnificent structure 
replacing the old one, pulled down in favour of the approaches 
to the Bridge), was erected an elegant pavilion for the accom¬ 
modation of their Majesties, the Royal suite, the civic 
authorities, and the. more distinguished of the company. In 
this pavilion, the whole party afterwards partook of a princely 
collation. 

Her present Majesty, Queen Victoria, on the decease of 
her Royal uncle, June 20, 1837, ascended the throne. On the 
9th of November ensuing, her Majesty proceeded in state to 
Guildhall, to dine with the Mayor and Corporation. The 
Queen was received at Temple Bar by the civic authori¬ 
ties ; the day was regarded as a public national festival; at 
night, along the whole line of the returning procession, the 
illumination was general; and nothing could surpass in enthu¬ 
siasm the joy and delight evinced by the people at large. 

Her Majesty was crowned on the 28th of June, 1838; and, 
excepting that no coronation banquet was given, the ceremony 
was of a splendid and imposing description. 

May her Majesty’s reign be long, prosperous, and happy! 

finis. 


D D 


DIRECTIONS TO THE BINDER. 


PAG E 

Monument, and St. Magnus Church (Vignette Title). 

King William Street, and St. Mary Woolnoth . . .2 

v West India Dock . . . . . . . 16 

The Upper Pool . . . . . . .18 

v- Cheapside, and Bow Church . . . . . . 20 

✓ Custom House . ...... 28 

High Street, Whitechapel . . . . . . 29 

v Billingsgate . . . . . . . .41 

^ Southwark, Church, &c. . . . . 43 

^ Westminster Hospital, and Abbey . . . . .48 

*• London Bridge . . . . . . . 68 

Fishmongers’ Hall . ...... 70 

Somerset House, Strand . . . . . . 73 

St. Martin’s Church, from Charing Cross . . . .116 

Cumberland Terrace, Regent’s Park . . . . . 129 

Westminster Abbey (Interior) . . . . .145 

Mansion House . . . . . . . 147 

Leadenhall Street . . . . . . .148 

e General Post Office . . . . . . . 168 

v Royal Exchange and Cornhill . . . . .176 

•/* Royal Exchange (Interior) . . . . 177 

u- City of London School . . . . . . 178 

r Limehouse Church . . . . . . . 191 

u- The Quadrant, Regent Street . . . . .193 

^ Buckingham Palace . . . . . . . 194 

■' St. James’s Park . . . . . . .196 

Horse Guards. . . . . . . . . 197 

^ Duke of York’s Column . . . . . .198 

Coliseum . . . . . . ..199 

St. Katherine’s Hospital, Regent’s Park .... 200 











I N DEX. 


Academy, Royal, 200 
Alfred, King, 35 
Anne, Queen, 191 

Apparel, proclamation respecting, 176 

Archery, 123 

Armada, Spanish, 179 

Barbican, 28 

Baynard, Castle, 151 

Beckford, W., 198 

Birds, strange, 197 

Boadicea, 18 

Boleyn, Queen Anne, 172 
Bridges, 56, 64, 196, 200, 201 
Bubble, South Sea, 194 
Buonaparte, abdication of, 199 
Cade, Jack, 22, 156 
Caesar, expedition of, 7 
Calendar, correction of the, 195 
Canute, King, 46 

Charles, I., King, 183 ; Charles II., 
184 

Charter House, the, 182 
Christian VII., King, 198 
Churches, fifty new, 191 
Coal, use of prohibited, 101 
Companies, City, 141 
Cromwell, Oliver, 184 
Danes, landing of the, 35, 41 
Exchange, Royal, 176 
Edmund Ironside, King, 42 
Edward the Confessor, King, 47 
Edward the Elder, King, 38 
Edward, the Black Prince, 121 
Edward I., King, 97; Edward II., 100 ; 
Edward III., 106, 110; Edward 
IV., 160; Edward V., 164; Edward 
VI., 173 
Egbert, King, 35 
Elizabeth, Queen, 175 
Feasts, City, 169, 199, 201 
Fires, 39, 56, 187 
Gas, introduction of, 200 
Gates, City, 25 

George, I., King, 192; George II., 
195; George III., 197 ; George IV., 
200 

Gresham, Sir T., 176 
Guildhall, 147 

Henry I., King, 55 ; Henry II., 62, 70; 
Henry III., 85; Henry IV., 145; 
Henry V., 147; Henry VI., 149, 162; 
Henry VII., 164; Henry VIII., 
166 


Hicks, Sir B., 182 
Houndsditch, 165 

James I., King, 181; James II., 190 
John, King, 80 

London, origin of the name of, 2, 17, 
24; Population of, 59; Commerce 
of, 59, 182; Modern improvements 
in, 191 ; Fire of, in 1666, 187 
Lottery, the first, 178 
Luxury, 78 
Malpas, Philip, 153 
Marlborough, Duke of, 191 
Mary, Queen of Scots, 174 
Mary, the bloody Queen, 175 
May-day, evil, 168 
Monument, the, 190 
Myddelton, Sir Hugh, 181 
Mystery, ancient, 75 
Osborne, Edmund, 69 
Philpot, Sir John, 135 
Plague, the, 124, 125, 127, 146, 163, 
176, 186 

Pretender, the, 195 
Protestants, French, 191 
Provisions, price of, 125, 165, 169, 178 
Richard I., King, 71 ; Richard II., 
123; Richard III., 169 
Riot, Mughouse, 194 
Riots, “ Fifth-Monarchy-Men,” 184 
Riots, “ No Popery,” 198 
Roads, military, 22 
Robbers, street, 197 
Saxons, arrival of the, 33 
School, Blue Coat, 173 
School, City of London, 177 
Sovereigns, visit of the, 199 
Sports, 31, 79, 123 
Sports, Book of, 183 
Thanksgiving, public, 198, 199 
Thieves, school for, 180 
Tyler, Wat, 132 
Victoria, Queen, 201 
Volunteers, 199 
Wallace, Sir W., 101 
Walpole, Sir R., defeat of, 196 
Walworth, Sir W., 134, 136 
Wards, the twenty-four, 102 
Water, supply of, 95 
Wellington, Duke of, 198, 199 
William I., King, 50; William II., 
53; William III., 191; William 
IV., 200 

Wyatt, Sir T. 175 





MACINTOSH, PRINTER, 
GREAT NEW STREET, LONDON. 















